User talk:Glades12

Archives

Archive 1

Chozhia Vellalar and Saiva Vellalar Pages like this are short and don't have proper references are they supposed to be on Wikipedia Mamallarnarashimavarman (talk) 06:52, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@

talk) 07:19, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

The redirection should be removed and

Discuss the matter

talk) 11:54, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect See You Again (song). Since you had some involvement with the See You Again (song) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. — Newslinger talk 02:12, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia talk:Redirects for discussion#Coal truck & coal trucks Peter Horn User talk 13:57, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Make that Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 October 24#Coal trucks. Peter Horn User talk 14:34, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No thanks. I will add the template.

talk) 08:57, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to [email protected], so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at [email protected].

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, I've had more than one redirect deleted for that very reason without any resistance. There's no good reason for it not to be deleted: typing "Recessive Lethal" into Wikipedia search takes you to

None of those are valid

talk) 09:39, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

They are. Implausible typo is

Wikipedia:other stuff exists essay could be used to argue away anything. It's meaningless when rules exist and past examples of their enforcement are because of the rules existing. But forget it. SUM1 (talk) 15:41, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

That criterion only applies if the error is implausible. Alternative capitalisations aren't implausible; someone could paste them in from the title of an article in a journal, or search in those capitalisations after mistaking them for proper names in speech. The essay can't argue away anything. It explains why simply going from precedents (as you have done here) is not always the best thing to do. Again, the rules you cite are against redirects from implausible typos, not all of them. Glades12 (talk) 18:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@

CASSIOPEIA: I did not create the page; Turaids did. Glades12 (talk) 15:11, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi Glades12, The message above is not about creation of the page but removing the CSD tag - See HERE. Only Admin could remove the tag if their find the CSD is not warrant. Thank you.

talk) 15:16, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Just to let you know that an admin has removed the tag.

talk) 15:21, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Hmm, I don't think so. Neither WP:CSD nor any of its associated templates specifically prohibit anyone but page authors from removing CSD tags. Could you find and quote the place where you learned that only admins can? Glades12 (talk) 17:06, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, the above is for the creator and you are not. 17:20, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

@Glades12:

Respectfully, I disagree that adding a single citation to a previous diff counts as anything other a minor edit, particularly since the subject of the then article failed our notability guidelines. Moreover, these redirects were created by the

No one is going to miss these redirects and will save them staying at

Thanks,
--Doug Mehus T·C 14:59, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't mention the act of turning the articles into redirects by a non-sockpuppet, which I consider to be the main thing that exempts them from G5, or at least turns this into an ambiguous case where speedy deletion is not a good option. (Excuse me for being unclear previously.) If you can convince me otherwise, I'll add back the tags. Glades12 (talk) 16:43, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

sockpuppet account in 2018 as belonging to User:Charles lindberg. Charles lindberg, in turn, was blocked in June 2017, before these redirects were created. I would call this a borderline case of a G5 on the premise that the sockpuppet account, VivaSlava, was not yet found out/confirmed but Charles lindberg had an active SPI investigation opened and, indeed, was blocked before they were created. Nevertheless, these will fail RfD; I see no reason to hanging on to this crud for a week. Doug Mehus T·C 17:34, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

@

Wikipedia:G5 states that it does not apply to pages substantially edited by others than the creator, and turning an article into a redirect probably counts as a substantial edit. Also, I understand wanting to skip the RFD process, but it is possible that a reason for the redirs to be kept or retargeted will come to light (e.g. someone finding sources extensively covering the persons). Granted, I doubt that and currently see no reason for keeping. Glades12 (talk) 18:19, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Glades12, Yeah, I wouldn't count a redirect as being a substantial edit. I guess that's where we only disagree there. Apologies for the confusion. I'm okay with seeing this through to deletion, but at the same time, I don't see any point in keeping it as there are no plausible targets to which to retarget it. Doug Mehus T·C 18:47, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For your diligence at speedy deletion tag(s) to apply first (i.e., not necessarily G14). Had I tagged it as G6 first, you may not have declined it. Doug Mehus T·C 18:08, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply ]

Hello! I saw that you created the talk page in the redirect. I've added better sources on the subject at the talk page of Stockholm. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.234.33.218 (talk) 17:26, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your apparent wish to keep the Redirect

What would you like to do here rather than just reverting & keeping this redirect which is inappropriate simply because the word is not to be found in the article. You summarized your revert with confusing to readers - what could be more confusing than a redirect to an article where the redirected term does not appear anywhere?

Two administrators have recently commented on this, one that the redirect should be deleted, the other that the pejorative word should not be added to the article. Any constructive ideas? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:46, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Empire AS ^Talk! — is wishing you a Happy New Year! It's the last day of 2020 and tomorrow will be 2025. Hope the coming year brings pleasures for you. Have a prosperous, enjoyable and a productive 2025. This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Empire AS ^Talk! 18:20, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect

Template:Template ambiguous has been nominated for merging with Template:Template disambiguation. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Gonnym (talk) 09:36, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
• disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
• is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:03, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Afro- and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 23 § Afro- until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. An anonymous username, not my real name 01:11, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Glades12! You might be interested in

]

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thank you. talk) 20:30, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply ]

The redirect ') has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 14 § ') until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 15:13, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]