 | Cookie Monster is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
Hi Coookiemonster! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as
typo corrections or reverting obvious
vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see
Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you.
Alexeyevitch(
talk) 10:17, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Alright mu bad will make sure not to do it again Coookiemonster ( talk) 10:20, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
There are 2 films (1973, 2009) titled Neramu Siksha, so Neramu Siksha (film) refers to both of them. Also, the 1973 film is primary topic so Neramu Siksha (2009 film) is the correct title for the 2009 film. DareshMohan ( talk) 17:53, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- DareshMohan, my mistake for missing that, when it is moved to main space that could be disambiguated — 🍪 Cookie Monster 18:01, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Coookiemonster,
You have only been editing here for a few months and so I think you should be careful about closing AFD deletion discussions. Please review Wikipedia:Non-admin closure very carefully. NACs should only occur where the consensus is unanimous or nearly so and never with a "close call" or a Delete outcome. Believe me, you don't want to be taken to Wikipedia:Deletion review if an editor disputes your closure decision or your choice of AFDs to close, it can be a very unpleasant experience. I appreciate your willingness to help out with administrative tasks, it's just very easy for new editors to dive into areas where their editing decisions can lead to more scrutiny of them as an editor. Again, please review that policy page and thank you for your help. Liz Read! Talk! 21:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Coookiemonster,
- Please do not relist any and all open AFD discussions. There are some administrators who focus on older, complicated deletion discussions and AFDs are left for them to handle. If no one has commented since the last relisting and one of the regular closers has left a discussion open, it is probably being left for one of the other closers to handle and shouldn't be relisted. You'd have a better sense for this if you had more editing experience which is why I urged caution with your involvement in "handling" AFD discussions. It's really not a place for new editors to be "helping out". Liz Read! Talk! 07:34, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
I believe the entire argument from the keep side was very weakly supported by essays and irrelevant walls of text that mostly did not have any value. The article on Justin Jin (entrepreneur) has received over 800 views with a daily average of 40+, which is significant considering it doesn't appear as the first hit in a Google search. I am taking this to WP:DRV as I believe the right call would have been to relist the AfD for the 2nd time to get more arguments based on policy, but instead, you closed it too soon. Close calls and controversial decisions are better left to admins per WP:NACD. Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk) 08:32, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Deletion review for Justin Jin (entrepreneur)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Justin Jin (entrepreneur). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk) 11:06, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Coookiemonster,
- I just can't believe you chose to close this contentious AFD. It's like you didn't read anything I wrote to you! This was a colossal mistake that I told you would happen and it was a terrible AFD for an NAC closer. I just give up on trying to advise you since you are ignoring my advice to keep you from getting in over your head. Liz Read! Talk! 23:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{
unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the
Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.
| Cookie Monster is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
Hi Coookiemonster! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as
typo corrections or reverting obvious
vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see
Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you.
Alexeyevitch(
talk) 10:17, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Alright mu bad will make sure not to do it again Coookiemonster ( talk) 10:20, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
There are 2 films (1973, 2009) titled Neramu Siksha, so Neramu Siksha (film) refers to both of them. Also, the 1973 film is primary topic so Neramu Siksha (2009 film) is the correct title for the 2009 film. DareshMohan ( talk) 17:53, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- DareshMohan, my mistake for missing that, when it is moved to main space that could be disambiguated — 🍪 Cookie Monster 18:01, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Coookiemonster,
You have only been editing here for a few months and so I think you should be careful about closing AFD deletion discussions. Please review Wikipedia:Non-admin closure very carefully. NACs should only occur where the consensus is unanimous or nearly so and never with a "close call" or a Delete outcome. Believe me, you don't want to be taken to Wikipedia:Deletion review if an editor disputes your closure decision or your choice of AFDs to close, it can be a very unpleasant experience. I appreciate your willingness to help out with administrative tasks, it's just very easy for new editors to dive into areas where their editing decisions can lead to more scrutiny of them as an editor. Again, please review that policy page and thank you for your help. Liz Read! Talk! 21:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Coookiemonster,
- Please do not relist any and all open AFD discussions. There are some administrators who focus on older, complicated deletion discussions and AFDs are left for them to handle. If no one has commented since the last relisting and one of the regular closers has left a discussion open, it is probably being left for one of the other closers to handle and shouldn't be relisted. You'd have a better sense for this if you had more editing experience which is why I urged caution with your involvement in "handling" AFD discussions. It's really not a place for new editors to be "helping out". Liz Read! Talk! 07:34, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
I believe the entire argument from the keep side was very weakly supported by essays and irrelevant walls of text that mostly did not have any value. The article on Justin Jin (entrepreneur) has received over 800 views with a daily average of 40+, which is significant considering it doesn't appear as the first hit in a Google search. I am taking this to WP:DRV as I believe the right call would have been to relist the AfD for the 2nd time to get more arguments based on policy, but instead, you closed it too soon. Close calls and controversial decisions are better left to admins per WP:NACD. Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk) 08:32, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Deletion review for Justin Jin (entrepreneur)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Justin Jin (entrepreneur). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk) 11:06, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Coookiemonster,
- I just can't believe you chose to close this contentious AFD. It's like you didn't read anything I wrote to you! This was a colossal mistake that I told you would happen and it was a terrible AFD for an NAC closer. I just give up on trying to advise you since you are ignoring my advice to keep you from getting in over your head. Liz Read! Talk! 23:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{
unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the
Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.