User talk:Liz/Archive 33

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.

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2020).

Administrator changes

Eddie891

Angela • Jcw69 • Just Chilling • Philg88 • Viajero

CheckUser changes

SQL

Guideline and policy news

• Following a
  site ban
  discussions was increased to 72 hours, up from 24.
• A
  paid editors must or should use the articles for creation
  process.
• A
  alternative to deletion
  processes.

Arbitration

• A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2020 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
• An open request for comment asks whether active Arbitrators may serve on the Trust and Safety Case Review Committee or Ombudsman commission.

Can user:50.48.174.66 please be blocked ASAP. CLCStudent (talk) 23:43, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:50, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Liz - you deleted Template:Song of Hope as I requested, but you moved it straight into mainspace... you probably shouldn't have done that as it's already been declined at Draft:Song For Hope and effectively you've just bypassed the AfC process. Richard3120 (talk) 00:45, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Richard3120, I'll look into it. I didn't know it was a draft. It was tagged for deletion as a template when it was clearly an article, not a template. I'll check it. Thanks for letting me know. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I tagged it because it was obviously in the wrong mainspace, but I thought it would be deleted outright, not moved. I can see why it wasn't accepted at AfC, the sourcing is very poor. Richard3120 (talk) 02:21, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I see that you deleted the article. I would be grateful if you could return it to me so i can continue to edit it and try to get some people to help me edit it to so that we can go over it before submitting it.ZNTEAI (talk) 18:17, 6 September 2020 (UTC)Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).

Hello!

First of all many thanks for your admin work.

Looks like you deleted

Would you care to restore the dab page, even in a personal space, or do you wish me to raise it at DRV? Place Clichy (talk) 09:32, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

(

WP:G14 then and would need a fuller discussion to be deleted. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)}

15:13, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@Bait30: just for information, in case you and Liz are not aware of it, Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars started an ANI discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1046#Soul Crusher's redirects, and the three of us have discussed the issue on Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars' talk page. I'm just puzzled that someone with 14 years on Wikipedia and over 25,000 edits seems to disregard some basic Wikipedia guidelines regarding notability. Richard3120 (talk) 18:46, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Greetings! I kindly ask You for guidance in subject of redirecting art.

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 40, July – August 2020

• New partnerships
  • Al Manhal
  • Ancestry
  • RILM
• #1Lib1Ref May 2020 report
• AfLIA hires a Wikipedian-in-Residence

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:14, 10 September 2020 (UTC) Hello Liz, I responded to your original comment on the speedy deletion of the page I was attempting to create for Camster, but you may not have seen it. Still pretty new to Wikipedia so havent gotten it all down. The contention for the page was that it is not a directory for businesses and I am attempting to try and understand a way to ensure it does not come off that way and would appreciate your help. My only intent is to provide information about the site for readers as I can see many like sites have done such and want to follow suit. We had noticed those pages and wanted to ensure that we provided similar facts and information about our site. Trying to find the best way about it and could appreciate any help you could provide. Thank you.Eloravsmedia (talk) 20:55, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, this is about

Category:Los Angeles Kings logos is no longer empty. Please will you undelete it?

Thanks. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:49, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

WP:REFUND. Liz appears to be experiencing technical difficulties (see the message at the top of this page), and judging from her activity it appears that that only part of the Wikipedia interface she has access to at the moment is the delete button. – Uanfala (talk)

11:36, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, @Uanfala. I hope that Liz's computer woes get resolved soon.

The issue is now moot, since the Category:Los Angeles Kings logos has been emptied again. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:12, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{

ygm}} template.

Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)}

19:44, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors September 2020 Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors September 2020 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the September GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2020.                  Current and upcoming events September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today! Election reminder: our end-of-year Election of Coordinators opens for nominations on 1 December. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. Drive and Blitz reports requests and articles tagged in May. 19 participating editors claimed 54 copy edits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here . self-isolated drives. Of the 38 people who signed up, 30 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here . August Blitz: From 16 to 22 August, we copy edited articles tagged in June and July 2020 and requests. 12 participating editors completed 37 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Other news June election: Jonesey95 was chosen to continue as lead coordinator, assisted by Baffle gab1978, Tdslk, Twofingered Typist, and first-time coordinator Puddleglum2.0. Reidgreg took a break after serving for a couple years. Thanks to everyone who participated! Progress report: As of 01:33, 18 September 2020 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors had processed 532 requests since 1 January and there were 38 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page . The backlog of articles tagged for copy-editing stood at 433 (see monthly progress graph above). Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, Puddleglum2.0, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 16:52, 19 September 2020 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{

ygm

}} template.

Jackmcbarn (talk) 16:52, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Liz ^{Read! Talk!}, Hirolovesswords (talk) is being abusive and censoring legitimate information. How do we fix this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Setog1 (talk • contribs) 03:36, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

I don't think these drafts qualify for G-13 deletions because they have been edited recently.

• Draft:James W. Starnes
• Draft:James Jefferson Morrison
• Draft:Film exchange
  ‎
• Draft:Joseph W. Waldo

FloridaArmy (talk) 02:18, 22 September 2020 (UTC) ‎

FloridaArmy, I've restored two that were still deleted. In the case of stale drafts, G13s, please remove CSD tags on them if you edit them after they've been tagged. They are an exception to the guideline of not removing CSD tags from your own page creations. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:36, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks. FloridaArmy (talk) 15:43, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Liz. I was actually in the midst of declining the CSD of

Okay, Deacon Vorbis, I have restored it. I tend to delete redirects that are simply plural titles of actual articles. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:31, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for reconsidering. I guess it's just a little funny where people fall on the useful vs. not issue for redirects. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 15:34, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

I've removed a lot of tags from redirects that were tagged as implausible that I thought were legitimate. But my general rule is to delete ones that are longer versions of a simpler article title (using the same words) unless it is an official alternative name. But I guess it comes down to individual judgment. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:40, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Please block user:2600:1015:B063:3D03:14D4:F085:B9D7:F70A ASAP. CLCStudent (talk) 23:55, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Money trees has taken care of it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:03, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Liz - thanks for speedy deleting the

I see you have already done this too now - thank you! Deus et lex (talk) 05:03, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Can you give some explanation of why you deemed the Padlet page "unambiguous advertising"? It was a straight-down-the-line - factual descriptions, no superlatives, and I even added text about questions about their business model to stave off this kind of action. I have no relationship to the site, which is linked to by dozens or hundreds of educational institution web pages. I was asked to use the site, and when I tried to find out about it, it was not on Wikipedia so I researched it myself. Do I have to make up bad stuff to say about them? Put another way, please tell me what your beef was so I can recreate the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oblivy (talk • contribs) 05:36, 24 September 2020 (UTC) \

Since there has been no response to this I'm going to assume you have no substantive objection, at least one consistent with the text of G11, to the page being recreated. I vow to make it ambiguously unpromotional, just as I did the first time, but mostly to avoid a revert war infraction. To the extent this goes against assume good faith, I'm going to rest on Hanlon's Razor, that you deleted it carelessly, without considering much beyond the fact another account had flagged it for speedy deletion. I note that newly-registered account has recently been scolded for misapplying speedy deletion. If you're going to object, please do it now and help me avoid wasting more time.Oblivy (talk) 08:45, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Please reconsider the speedy-deletion requests for the empty "births in year" categories. I think all but one of the "by year" categories in Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion were nominated by you.

These pages have a purpose. They are part of a "births by year" set. Deleting one means when someone writes an article about someone who was born in that year, there will be a non-empty red-category if they blindly add it to the appropriate category.

I can see several ways to solve this, all equally good:

• Have a bot delete and create these categories as they become populated or empty.
• For historical times, such as before A.D. 1000, have a births by decade or births by century category instead, and allow them to be empty.
• Change the Wikimedia software to allow "dynamic categories" which only exist when populated, with their description based on a template. For example, you could have a meta-category-template for "{{YEAR}} births" and if someone put a page in the category
  WP:REDCAT
  . This would require discussion AND coding, which means it won't happen soon.

The alternative, which is to manually delete categories then manually re-create them when they are no longer empty, is worse than just leaving all the categories in place even if they are empty.

What do you think? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:03, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, davidwr,

There is a lot going on here which I'll try to keep short.

First, every day, I tag empty categories that appear on a database list. It's just part of my daily routine. There are specific criteria for when we can allow empty categories and they don't include the fact that it might be handy in the future to have a category that is currently empty.

Second, about a year or so ago, we had a vandal who would go to obscure historical figures and change their birth/death dates by a year or two. They did a lot of damage, with multiple IP accounts, that was eventually undone. But the only reason that we found them out was because the birth/death categories showed up as empty categories. These categories are often occupied by only one person so if that birth/death date is changed, the category shows up as empty. So, I'm always a bit suspicious when I see them listed.

Some of the yearly birth categories recently started showing up on the empty categories list and, yes, I tagged them. But I didn't want to delete them until I investigated. It turns out that it is not a vandal but, I'm guessing, it's a thoughtful editor who is taking into account the fact that the historical record is less than 100% accurate. So, if a person is said to have been born c. 873, they will put them in the category, 870s births rather than 873 births. So, it's not vandalism, just a different interpretation of how to categorize dates of historical figures.

That all being said, I still don't like deleting yearly categories. So, if you go into my recent contributions, you'll find that I've recategorized a few people with a strict interpretation of their birth year. That is an arguable decision that I'm sure could be challenged and might very well be reverted by another editor in the future.

It's really easy to create new categories when they are needed but your bot idea would be useful, I think. There is a bot that does this kind of thing for our maintenance categories, the bot creates the categories, they become empty and get deleted but are recreated by the bot should we need them again. But I'm not sure how to bring this idea about. You might go to one of our current group of bot creators or the Wikipedia:Bot Approvals Group and see if this would be a process that would be easy to implement.

If you are seeking a different way to organize our yearly birth and death categories, that is an enormous decision that is beyond the ability of one admin to implement as it is a fundamental change to the category structure and it involves thousands of categories. It's not impossible to change but there are a lot of people who will want to make their opinion known on the subject. You'll need to bring that discussion to

Categories for Discussion

.

I guess I haven't kept this very short. Bottom line for now is if I can find someone who is born in the year of a CSD C1 tagged year of birth category, I will recategorize them so the category is no longer empty. If I can't find someone born in that year, then the empty category will need to be deleted for right now. I hope this explanation helps. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:49, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the thorough explanation. I had not considered that red-cat year-of-births would actually be useful in catching vandals. That gives me pause. I still like the idea of a bot that would create and delete the categories AND while it's at it, flag for possible category-membership-related vandalism. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:58, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

I still disagree with your block of User:Epicderby. The account is evidently a VOA and they really went against BLP violations by adding explicit and erroneous content to the kids article. Please reconsider Megan☺️ ^{Talk to the monster} 11:37, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Another admin has lengthened the block. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:44, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

(

WP:NOTHERE. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:49, 25 September 2020 (UTC) Update: All are insults or worse if internet translations and searches are correct. Other NOTHERE editors and IP editors have done similar in the last few days that need similar treatment. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs

) 16:45, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Possible copyright violation. The account has been blocked and they have already had some of their other revisions deleted for the same reason. [1]

 Done Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:13, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi

Twice I've had my additions regarding daniel Radcliffe admission of having racist friends removed. Once with the excuse of not being notable, the other being trivia.

Radcliffe admission is both part of the public and media domain and that makes it notable and important to add. It's both credible and not trivia supported by renowned media reports/sources Hpdh4 (talk) 00:06, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Just because information is published does not make it notable and worth including in an encyclopedia article. Trivial stuff like astrological signs, workout routines and personal habits are included in the press which are not suitable for Wikipedia. Please discuss it on the article talk page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:09, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Did you mean to delete Draft talk:Sheikh Shaher Sayel Al-Hadid as R2? It was neither a redirect nor in mainspace. Jackmcbarn (talk) 03:41, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

My mistake. I was deleting the redirect to it. Thanks for letting me know. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:55, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm not going to contest the speedy deletion of the Category:Tornadoes in Montana page as the article that will be going on the page is FAR from being completed. I'll just ask this: Can I add the category page back in once the article I'm making is done?ChessEric (talk) 14:31, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Also, I hope you don't mind, but I borrowed some of the text on your top line and put it in my own talk page (thought it might be useful).ChessEric (talk) 14:38, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, ChessEric,

Just to let you note that empty category tagging (CSD C1) is quite different from other kinds of speedy deletion. Except for a few exeptions (like categories being disussed at

CfD

or category redirects), empty categories are tagged when they are found. They are placed in a holding category for 7 days. If, after 7 days, they are still empty, they are deleted. If at least one page/article has been placed in the category over that week, then the tag is removed. Also, categories deleted because they are empty can be restored at any time should there be a need for them. This is different from categories that have been deleted through CfD deletion discussions.

So, don't worry, you have 7 days to find a page that is an appropriate fit for this category. And if the category is deleted for being empty, you can recreate it when you do need it. I hope this answers any concerns you have.

And feel free to borrow any user page content you find as long as it is attributed to the editor who wrote it. Thanks for letting me know! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:45, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Howdy Liz,

Knowing that you are an extremely busy Wiki editor, I shall keep this short. I am an avid follower of digital cinema, and thus have been following GDC Technology for years since GDC has contributed to the world's cinema during its transition from 35mm film to digital cinema. Everything I had written on GDC technology is factual information without any mention or promotion of GDC's products or services. Moreover, I used very reputable and accessible news references such as Bloomberg, Reuters, Variety and The Hollywood Reporter to support my contributions. I would be grateful if you could advise what was inappropriate about my GDC Technology Limited page. Regarding the original accusation from "1292Simon" about "not having enough sources and citations as written to remain published", I replied him in my Talk page.

Justanotherwikipediauser (talk) 16:19, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Justanotherwikipediauser,

As far as I can see, I just deleted a redirect, a link that points from one page to another after an article/draft is moved. It looks like Deb deleted the article you were working on. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:24, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Can you please send to my sandbox the article /wiki/zerion.net — Preceding unsigned comment added by Holtiana (talk • contribs) 19:18, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:23, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, why have you deleted User:SD0001 and a bunch of other pages? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:59, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Redrose64,

After 5 years as an admin, I tried to do a batch delete today for the first time with

Twinkle. It was not completely successful. Between myself and Primefac, we restored the pages that were mistakenly deleted by me. Most of them were restored within 5 minutes after deletion but User:SD0001 was one that I missed. I appreciate you bringing it to my attention and will let SD0001 know of my error. Liz ^{Read! Talk!}

21:35, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed you deleted https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Twsx/Userboxes/Huggle&action=edit&redlink=1 You mentioned previously that you had a batch go south, I was wondering if maybe this was another accidental victim? Thanks! CarbonX (talk) 00:52, 29 September 202vUser:Twsx0 (UTC)

Hi, CarbonX,

Today, editor Twsx was cleaning up their user space and requested that about a dozen user pages get deleted. You should tell them if you want it restored, get their okay and I can do that immediately. But I don't want to restore a page that the page creator doesn't want. Ask Twsx and get back to me. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:02, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Not a big deal. I just noticed something wonky on my userpage and saw that you were listed as making the deletion. If Twsx wanted it gone than so be it. Have a great day! 05:16, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Oh woops, I didn't consider the possibility of other people using these userboxes. I hadn't used them in many years, so when I was cleaning out my old subpages I figured I'd just have those removed as well. Sorry about that. If you still want it, you can of course ask to have the page reinstated, absolutely fine with me. I would recommend though that you copy the UBX do your own userspace as I may delete it again some time in the future. Thanks! ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 13:11, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed you deleted 05:11, 29 September 2020 Liz talk contribs protected Draft:David V Golden [Create=Require administrator access] (indefinite) You mentioned previously that you had a batch go south, I was wondering if maybe this was another accidental mistakes? I do need your current expertise in these articles. Thanks!

Yes, i believed this Draft:David V Golden shouldn't be remove. Because i noticed they recently edited. :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.125.245.79 (talk) 07:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

The draft was deleted twice by administers for basically being an advertisement for a nonnotable podcaster and IP editors were edit-warring over it. It clearly warranted deletion and protection since the article was written both in main space and draft space. I left the draft for the podcast open which you can continue to work on but it didn't look promising. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:45, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Blocked users are constantly framing and attacking me.

He's making another ID or using the IP address to attack me and ruin the debate, even if he's blocked.

This time, I asked for Sockpuppet investigations.

But it's happening again and again.

He's even attacking me using external homepage.

He is interfering with the debate to keep false information from being deleted in Wikipedia.

All the evidence has been submitted here. [[2]]

I'd like to ask for your advice. Bablos939 (talk) 03:28, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

You've gone to a lot of work filing a SPI, I'd let the SPI clerks & checkusers respond to it which will take more than an hour.

I'd recommend broadening your interests and stop fixating on Interracial marriage which seems to be the point of contention. There are over 6 million articles, please consider working on a different article for a while and get out of this tug-of-war. Right now, you are trying to win a war of attrition and there are literally millions of other subjects where you could edit where you wouldn't run into this editor. If this editor is socking, he will face consequences. Right now, I'd stay off the battlefield. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:40, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. I just tried to prevent the wrong blocked users from making false contributions in Wikipedia. I'm going to normalize the document with another debater and leave this text for another one. Thank you for your reply.Bablos939 (talk) 03:54, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Bablos939, I'm sorry for the position you are in. I have been targeted in someone's blog off-Wikipedia and even knowing that the readership was minimal, it's not fun knowing it's out there. Conflicts are very common here on the project but this one has clearly escalated. I hope you find quieter pages where you can contribute. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:13, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice. do not want to enter that dispute too. I don't really care about winning. All that matters to me is the true informaion in wikipedia. The document has an agreement with other normal debaters. I will only implement the agreement and minimize the dispute.Then I will leave the battlefield immediatelyBold text. thank you.Bablos939 (talk) 05:31, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

There are just some articles that are magnets for disputes. I've seen very good editors get sucked into unwinnable edit wars on some topics. At best, they return later and can do some repair work, at worst, it ends up in Dispute Resolution or Arbitration. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:35, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

There are many good editors in Wikipedia and I believe a constructive agreement will keep the document always.I will always keep your advice in mind.thank youBablos939 (talk) 05:48, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2020).

Administrator changes

Ajpolino • LuK3

Jackmcbarn

Ad Orientem • Harej • Lid • Lomn • Mentoz86 • Oliver Pereira • XJaM

There'sNoTime → TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

• A
  draftification
  is appropriate, namely 1) if the result of a deletion discussion is to draftify; or 2) if the article is newly created.

Technical news

• The filter log now provides links to view diffs of deleted revisions (phab:T261630).

Arbitration

• The
  2020 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process
  has begun. The community consultation period will take place from September 27th to October 7th.
• Following a request for comment, sitting Committee members may not serve on either the Ombuds Commission or the WMF Case Review Committee. The Arbitration Committee passed a motion implementing those results into their procedures.

Miscellaneous

• The Universal Code of Conduct draft is open for community review and comment until October 6th, 2020.
• Office actions may now be appealed to the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee.

You reverted my edit with no explanation. As I wrote in the edit summary, the paragraph I removed did not mention the Trump Organization, but alleged misdeeds by members of the Trump family. Kindly undo your revert. Trying to reconnect (talk) 00:56, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

No, I will not undo my revert. Please discuss on the article talk page whether your edit is appropriate. You seem to be removing critical information about this organization over the past few days. Please discuss these moves with other editors first. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:03, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Certainly your prerogative. I expect you to show up at the talk page and defend your edit. Trying to reconnect (talk) 02:02, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

As I noted above, Tokenism and the "I have one black friend defense" apply here. They are white supremacist, while relying on white-passing "latinos" as a less-than-honest defensive tactic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:2C0:C300:B7:DC86:D98F:FCCF:BBC7 (talk) 01:29, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

That is racist and has no place on the WP-5mins after tone it down. Maybe it is time to post a pic of the Proud Boys leader on the page so this sort of obviously racist filth above ceases appearing on WP?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Proud_Boys — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:46:C801:B1F0:F5BB:3B86:E159:625A (talk) 02:17, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, 2601,

I disagree about the Proud Boys but that is not the issue. The issue is not the content but your attitude towards other editors. Disagree politely or don't edit here. That means no name-calling. At all.

Looks like I can't win with editors on the Right or Left tonight. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:32, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I am not the same 2601 name caller.:D I am a different one whom was complaining to you about the name caller's response after the name calling. "They are white supremacist, while relying on white-passing "latinos" as a less-than-honest defensive tactic"

the idea that they are relying on white-passing "latinos" is incredibly racist to me. I may agree with you regarding the diversity of the membership. I do know the diversity of the guy currently in charge of them and if his pic was on the page-I think a lot of the white supremacist stuff would stop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:46:C801:B1F0:F5BB:3B86:E159:625A (talk) 03:50, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't know about white-passing but the national leader of the Proud Boys is a Latino from Florida. I know because he's come to protests in Portland and it's covered by the press. He's been interviewed by the local media. That's a fact. Wikipedia isn't in the business of imputing motivations on to individuals. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:13, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a

Thank you for letting me know. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:00, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi,
I wrote the article Gabbie Carter.
I do not know how to deal with the

Hi, Dgw,

I deleted the draft as a duplicate of the article. This isn't a speedy deletion criteria but it's a reason for deletion I've seen other admins use. I don't think there is any way an admin would move over this draft and replace your article with it but it's better to be safe than have an accident. I hope this answers your concerns. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:59, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, thank you a lot for your assistance.

I would like to have your advice. I have not written articles about the adult industry. Usually I write about History and about people with disability.

Carter is a phenomenon. Every worker in the industry said it, from her agent, who worked 22 years with different models and did not see a model like her, to actors (including an actress), a director and magazines. In Hustler, she was on the cover page. I discussed it in the talk page of the article, after the line "prompt and steady achievements" was removed from the article's template with its source. There is no reply. I would be glad for your look. I consider this line as neutral, because it is backed well with sources. Thank you for your reading. Dgw (talk) 23:50, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Dgw,

I am not an article writer and I'm especially not an article writer for pornographic performers who I don't think belong in an encyclopedia, frankly.

Regarding puffery, check out

WP:PEACOCK, I know superlatives are discouraged and frequently removed. And I'd ask for advice at WikiProject Pornography, they will probably have article standards and be more experienced with this subject, which, honestly I have zero knowledge of except for creating and maintaining categories for sex workers and exotic dancers. I'm happy to help with technical and policy requests but this is not a subject I know much about. Sorry. Liz ^{Read! Talk!}

02:25, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Liz, I saw somewhere you made a comment about doing batch deletions. Are you doing batch deletions of G13 content? If so, does this include articles that were not manually tagged as G13 but are identified as having no edits in the last six months in some other way? Batch deletions of G13 content are concerning to me because there is a significant amount of content that is unfairly declined. I think having some degree of human review in the deletion process is important. Also, there is a bot that reports on things nominated for G13 deletion, but im not sure it will pick up deletions if that tag was never applied. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:58, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Calliopejen1,

Well, "Yes" and "No". I have done two or three batch deletions of G13 stale drafts that were tagged and appeared in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as abandoned drafts or AfC submissions. I did do one batch deletion of G13 stale drafts appearing on page User:SDZeroBot/G13 eligible sorting but that was a big mistake that will not be repeated (and there were FAR fewer drafts listed on that day than the many appear on that page today). I would never do a G13 batch deletion again except if there was a large group of tagged stale drafts appearing in the CSD deletion category where I'm assuming the editors tagging them have reviewed the drafts. I would never do a batch deletion again except to clear a CSD category that has more than a dozen tagged pages.

Over the past week, I've done a lot of G13 stale draft deletions but, except for my big mistake, all had a notice sent to the talk page of the page creator informing them of the deletion and the procedure for restoring their draft. To be honest, I've actually been surprised at how many are completely blank pages or have one sentence. I thought those empty drafts would have gotten tagged over the previous six months but maybe they do not come to anyone's attention until they are eligble for G13 status.

Regarding G13s, the custom of tagging and deleting them has changed over the past couple of weeks. Previously, once a day, Wikipedia:Database reports/Stale drafts was posted listing hundreds of G13 eligible drafts and one or a few editors would tag them over time and admins would delete them. Now, editors are tagging them before the database report is issued and that report is frequently blank and empty because of this change of habit.

Since I switched to dealing with G13s this week, I have noticed that the standard 5 month notices alerting the draft creator of the six month period approaching have not appeared on editor talk pages. I brought this up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation#G13 5 month notices and hopefully the new bot can start posting these notices again. I think it's important for page creators to be aware that their draft might be approaching G13 status, they are more likely to edit it and we will have fewer deletions and restorations.

I hope this has allayed your concerns. Since I started working with G13s this week, I have noticed that you, DGG and a few other editors are rescuing old drafts before they get to that G13 eligible status. Considering that we have thousands of drafts in the 5-6 month age range, this seems like an enormous task. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:35, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

That doesn't really alleviate my concerns... In the discussion about extending G13 to non-AFC drafts (including drafts that have never been submitted for AFC review for publication), there was more than one comment to the effect that "An admin is required to apply thought before deleting a speedy candidate". See Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion/Archive 65. Batch deletion completely removes any judgment about whether the G13 nominated draft is crap to delete or whether it should instead be moved to mainspace (or submitted for review). I don't think that a G13 nom shows that judgment has been applied because I don't think the people currently nominating articles en masse are actually applying any judgment. Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:31, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, if that is the case, then this issue involves more than my behavior but also those of editors who frequently tag G13s and of admins who patrol CSD categories who delete them. I've only been regularly checking these G13 drafts and G13 categories for the past week and I just did my first batch delete a few days ago. There are other admins who have been dealing with them on a more long-term basis before I was involved.

You should also talk to some of the admins who batch delete hundreds of tagged files that I believe should be inspected. I stay away from deleting any files because of the confusion surrounding their process of deletion but I've seen admins mass delete them nearly every day. I can change my behavior about G13s and inspect them more carefully but maybe the issue regarding batch delete as well as CSD tagging should be raised to a larger audience at the Village Pump. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:59, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Calliopejen1, for example, look at this afternoon's deletion log and you'll see that Fastily just did a batch deletion of G13 stale drafts that were tagged by Celestina007, an editor who tags many G13s . If you believe G13 stale draft deletions are a problem, then it is a problem with the use of batch delete by admins and G13 tagging by editors, not just the case of my mistaken batch deletion from the past week. I made a mistake but if there is a problem, then it is one that is bigger than just me. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:58, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Did you mean to delete

Thanks for catching that, Jack. I've restored the draft talk page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:38, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Sorry. I'm extremely confused on how this ISP works. I mean I read a lot but I still don't understand. How and where do I open a sockpuppet investigation ? Vamlos (talk) 02:50, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

You go to

WP:SPI

, to the section "How to open an investigation", hit "Show" on the upper right corner, and put the name of the sock master's username in the empty field. Hit "Submit" and then a new case page will open up where you can write your report. That page will contain a lot of information about what you are supposed to do, what information they need and where you can put your evidence.

Just be aware that for privacy reasons, Checkusers can not verify that a user account and an IP account are connected. This is one of their absolute rules. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:56, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Vamlos, I don't know why you didn't follow my very simple instructions. And this point, I give up. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Okay. I think I know what to do but did I do the right here aswell or should I remove it ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations . Sorry I didn't read your instructions because I was waiting for 5 minutes and gotten no response. I will be patient and wait longer next time. Thanks for helping me.Vamlos (talk) 03:17, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

From Liz: “A tag has been placed on Category:Lithuanian escapees requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia.”

Reply: I'm sorry; this page was created in error. (No need for details!). Please delete it. Thanks! Arrivisto (talk) 08:15, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for letting me know, Arrivisto. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:49, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Liz,

I saw that you deleted my draft article due to (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion). This is my first article and I agree that I'm not good writer and I want to improve. Can you reconsider and reinstate the article to draft space? This is my first article and I want to fixed it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marvz0015 (talk • contribs) 11:31, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Marvz0015,

I've restored your draft and moved it to User:Marvz0015/Sandbox where you can work on it. It will need a lot of work because it is very promotional and reads like an advertisement.

For writing advice, please go to

Articles for Creation and they can help you. I work on maintenance tasks on Wikipedia and not content creation and I'd go to the experts. Liz ^{Read! Talk!}

17:46, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

I added a CSD tag to the draft Febrian Chandra. In your edit summary, you declined the CSD saying that foreign language drafts are allowed. [3]. I'm not sure if you saw that in fact my reason for deletion was actually G11, but I used custom rational instead to explain why I nominated it, and that I used Google Translate to translate it. The language was not the reason for nomination, but instead that it was promotional, albeit in Indonesian).

Not sure if you saw this part of my edit summary or not, but just wanted to double check. Thanks! Giraffer ^munch 16:50, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Giraffer,

The way I interpreted your CSD message was that the draft should be deleted because it was in a foreign language and that would not be grounds for a speedy deletion for a draft. I couldn't judge whether it was promotional and I'm not sure how reliable Google Translate is for the nuances of an article.

In this case, I think if you feel strongly in your opinion, you can retag the article. Another admin might view it differently. My judgment though is to leave the draft and judge it when the content when it gets translated. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:37, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I think'll wait and see. Giraffer ^munch 17:43, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{

ygm}} template.Isabelle ^🔔

17:41, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. It was taken care of. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:03, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, just to let you know that I have removed the speedy deletion notice from Category:November 1974 sports events in the United States which you added when it was empty. I have found an article which clearly belongs in it so it is not empty anymore. My understanding is that this means it is not eligible for speedy deletion anymore, but if I have got this wrong please just let me know. Dunarc (talk) 22:51, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Dunarc,

You were right. It was right to find an appropriate page to put in an empty category. This will end a CSD C1 deletion. And you can remove a CSD notice if it is not appropriate any longer from any page as long as you are not the page creator.

But you don't have to worry about an empty category being deleted by mistake. Empty categories sit for 7 days before deletion and I know I, and probably others, check every day and remove categories that are no longer empty. This long waiting period is prevent categories that were emptied out-of-process from being deleted but it also enables editors to find appropriate pages to put in empty categories.

You might also like to know that categories deleted simply for being empty can be recreated if they are needed in the future. If a category has been deleted by a

CFD deletion discussion, this is not the case. So, even if an empty category were mistakenly deleted, it can be recreated by any editor, no problem. And this is probably more than you wanted to know about empty categories! Liz ^{Read! Talk!}

23:02, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for that on my user page!

	...
	Thanks for that, I really needed that advice on my user page! Stay Safe and have a good week! talk ) 00:06, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

No problem,

reliable sources and talk to other editors on the article talk page. Good luck! Liz ^{Read! Talk!}

00:13, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

I'll take a quick look, Marchjuly, but, to be honest, I've stayed pretty clear of noticeboards since my 2015 RfA where my frequent participation at AN/ANI was a major source of criticism of me and I barely passed. I got the message so I try not to be involved in the drama boards except a random opinion offered now and then. There are plenty of other places where I can make a contribution. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:18, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

I didn't see any conflict on Talk:2012 Benghazi attack but that is because User:NorthBySouthBaranof archived or reverted all of the comments. I don't think that this is an effective way of resolving disputes but I'm unwilling tonight to thrash this out. I'll add the page to my Watchlist to keep an eye on it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:24, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm unclear what else to do - it's not a "dispute" that those threads were in violation of multiple guidelines and policies for talk pages. Short of requesting the editor be blocked for those violations, my goal was to stop the edit war and take the material out of circulation. We can't just leave a thread titled "Hillary Clinton Lied to the American People" sitting around on a talk page. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 05:35, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

@Liz: Completely understand. Just saw you were online and figured I see if you could help out.-- Marchjuly (talk) 05:43, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

@

WP:USTHEM territory. Perhaps a firm line needed to be taken, particularly due to BLP concerns. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 05:43, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it was my mistake to end up giving you a ping, NBSB, right after I said I wasn't going to get into the details tonight. It looks like the editor has made an ill-formed request at A/R/E which will get rejected for being incomplete and so I posted a message on his talk page. I'm skeptical whether it will have any effect but I try to approach editors without being seen as an opponent. It's not typically successful but I try any way. We'll see what tomorrow brings. Good night. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:49, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Liz

Great to see you back. I hope that your computer woes are behind you.

A typo by me in

• Category:1511 in law
• Category:1520 in law
• Category:1594 in law
• Category:1637 in law
• Category:1671 in law
• Category:1771 in law

Please can you re-create them?

Sorry that my folly has added to your workload. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:44, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks for doing that, and esp for doing it so promptly. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:50, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done, any time, do not hesitate to ask.

Well, I learned there is actually more editing than I thought possible even when one is editing with one finger on a phone. So, I found I could do some admin activities but talk page comments and content edits were limited. Things are moving more quickly and efficiently now that I'm back to a keyboard. My previous laptop was a 2012 model and I'm slowly getting used to a new kind of large, fancy touchpad that has different functionality. I'll eventually get the hang of things. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:59, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

I know that feeling! I did a big upgrade two years ago, and there was a lot of adjustment. But it was all worthwhile. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)

Can user:2a00:23c6:3425:af00:5ce2:44f8:ead9:27cd please be blocked ASAP. CLCStudent (talk) 18:02, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:04, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Can user:198.17.32.201 please be blocked ASAP. CLCStudent (talk) 20:32, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:35, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

I did not create Draft:Ajeet Jaiswal and have no memory of being a significant contributor. David notMD (talk) 01:28, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, David notMD,

Well, that's odd. There are only 2 edits to this page, both by you. Your first edit summary says "moved the draft content to draft space, and some copyediting (less capitalization of words)" and the second one said you were doing more copy editing. And there were a few paragraphs of content there. But if you moved the page from main space or user space, there would be note of that move and there isn't.

By the way, Jaiswal is Ajeet Jaiswal (born 2 May 1979 at Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India) is an Assistant Professor of Bio-Physical Anthropology...is this ringing a bell?

If you are curious, I can restore it and do a test edit so that it delays G13 deletion another 6 month. Just let me know. That's the great thing about G13 deletions, the pages can be restored upon request very easily. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:38, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Let it stay deleted. Really, not mine. David notMD (talk) 01:40, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

user:RadicalzFan4L is attempting to abuse her talkpage if you look at filter logs. CLCStudent (talk) 14:39, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done. Wow, you seem everywhere at once, CLC. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:42, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Is it time for me to start fixing broken redirects and adding "R from ..." templates to redirects? Or is it still not a good time? Gioguch (talk) 19:58, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Gioguch,

Thanks for getting back to me. Sometimes I miss pings alerting me to a discussion.

The reason why I posted that notice on your talk page was it seemed like you were just inventing redirects that were unlikely to be search terms for editors looking for a subject like adding extra blank spaces to words and phrases. It's fine for you to "fix" broken redirects like redirects to blank pages.

But what I'd like you to do, if you want to continue to work in this area, is before you create any new redirects, read Wikipedia:Redirect thoroughly, know the guidelines & policies for Redirects on Wikipedia.

Next, look over the discussions on Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion...see what the arguments are for saving, changing or deleting questionable redirects that get nominated for discussion. Try to understand why some redirects are useful while others are not helpful at all or just bad ideas.

Don't look at redirects as a way to create a lot of new pages as an editor but become an expert in them and participate in RFD discussions yourself once you understand what the standards are for a good redirect. Then you'll be making a really valuable contribution to the project. Good luck. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:12, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

So about the weird Kenny Lorenzo page, what happened is I tried writing a bio for my friend Kenny Lorenzo to test my editing skills, but I somehow changed the page to User:KennyLorenzo, not really sure how, but yeah I was trying to use some kind of sandbox thing and I don't know what I did, but you probably won't find any reference for this guy, he's really not famous, Hell I don't think anyone still remembers him apart from me and my cousin. Is there a way to keep the page on a private sandbox thing where I can view and edit it, but it's not public? Anyhow really sorry for the mess I created, and I take full responsibility for my actions if this has consequences.

~~Omir Laa~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omir Laa (talk • contribs) 21:10, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker), @Omir Laa, the sandbox isn’t a space where articles on non notable persons are indefinitely collected. You mentioned that the individual isn’t notable so what then would be the purpose of arbitrarily editing a non notable article in your sandbox? I’m not Liz by the way. Celestina007 (talk) 21:18, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Omir Laa,

This isn't a standard solution to your problem but I will move your article to your user sandbox where you can work on it. The page will be deleted if after 6 months if you aren't continuing to improve it. Because he didn't publish his photographs, I agree that it will be hard to find some sources to support the contention that Lorenzo was a notable photographer. But I encourage you to keep at it! Good luck.

Celestina007, Omir Laa asked on my talk page because I posted a PROD on an article he wrote. I think it's fine for him to work on improving the bio since he is working on his editing skills. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:31, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, and I'm sorry if I caused a mess.

~~Omir Laa~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omir Laa (talk • contribs) 21:37, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Liz, please reconsider the removal of category Antigua and Barbuda articles missing geocoordinate data]]. It is a “Possibly empty category”. At Category:Articles missing geocoordinate data by country note that every country has such as list and that a few (such as Andorra and Liechtenstein) are empty. Some US States, such as Delaware, are empty on a regular basis - but they always get a few more articles missing coordinates and we all (especially me) need a place to find them. Partially my fault - I corrected the last article and did not add the Empty Category tag. I will be sure to add it to the restored category! Thank You. GeorgeofOrange (talk) 00:21, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, GeorgeofOrange,

Are you talking about Category:Antigua and Barbuda articles missing geocoordinate data? I've restored it and added an Empty Category tag. I hope that addresses your concerns. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:39, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! GeorgeofOrange (talk) 00:43, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi! As you are willing to do revdels - could you take a look at these two? I reverted the most recent as a personal attack because it makes an accusation against the subject which is not supported by the refs; I am not sure if it is of sufficient severity to warrant a revdel but I'd appreciate an expert's opinion. If you do revdel; I guess my own edit summary explaining why I reverted should come out too. - Thanks! Dorsetonian (talk) 14:31, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Dorsetonian,

Looking at these diffs, they could be seen as unflattering but they don't meet my understanding of the Criteria for Revision Deletion as being obscene, libelous or "grossly insulting". I'm also reluctant to take action because this looks like an ongoing content dispute that needs to be resolved on the article talk page first.

Personally, it looks like a 16 year old comment he made that I would argue that it doesn't add much to the article. But that's my opinion as an editor, not an admin. You, Hogyncymru and other interested editors need to discuss this content addition on Talk:James_May. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:56, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks - yes, I wasn't sure if it came close enough; thanks for reviewing! Dorsetonian (talk) 15:05, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I think the redirect at Black Widow (2020 film) should not have been deleted. I imagine many links have been made here and elsewhere that still point to that title, so I think it would make sense to keep it per

Hello, Brainulator9,

I think one can make an argument for deletion or restoring but I decided to restore upon your request. If you feel strongly, I would add the page to your Watchlist because it might be retagged in the future. My own view is reflected in Wikipedia:Redirects are cheap.

You could go directly to the editor who tagged it to discuss the issue or just wait and see if it gets tagged again. I know that this movie has been moved around to a number of different titles over the summer. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:14, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll try to keep an eye on things. I think I might point to Sonic the Hedgehog (2019 film) and its discussion as precedent for this sort of thing, even with the different circumstances behind the delays of both. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 01:20, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Somewhat confused about why I was notified about this. Did I create the category? I rarely do this but it’s always while trying to categorize a specific article. Apparently, if so, the article itself has been deleted or recategorized. The topic sounds important enough for its own category, but I have no memory of creating it, and I guess if it’s empty it should be deleted (?) it can always be re-created if needed, right? My only concern is that we have trouble getting articles on Turkish topics, and I wonder what happened to the original article. (Wikipedia was blocked there and may still be.) Bottom line, if I was notified because I created it, and it’s now empty, I guess it should be deleted. Elinruby (talk) 18:26, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Elinruby,

According to the edit history of the page, you created this category on August 18th. It's an empty category CSD tagging which means that the category will sit for 7 days. If any page gets placed in the category over this week, then the tag will be removed. If the category is still empty in a week, the category will be deleted. Should someone want to create an empty category at some point in the future, they are free to do so.

So, you can either find an article that is suitable to be placed in Category:Deforestation in Turkey or do nothing and it will be deleted next Monday, it's up to you! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:20, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@Liz: ok, thanks for explaining that to me. I am deep in something else right now but I will probably look into it quickly, next. If the category can re-created at some point for some suitable article, that assuages my primary concern. Elinruby (talk) 08:48, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Please block 162.192.3.165 (talk · contribs), persistent vandalism and inappropriate edit summaries on Corona. Maybe some revdels would be necessary. Thanks ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 23:27, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Nkon21,

Looks like Nick Moyes beat me to it. I was busy with some activity and didn't check my talk page quickly enough. Consider it taken care of, thanks to Nick. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:22, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your even-handed warning about edit warring on Anthony Bourdain. No snark, serious! LK (talk) 04:52, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

either I am feeling particularly tolerant this evening, or you're feeling the opposite.... wonder why--maybe we should take an average somehow,. DGG ( talk ) 10:55, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

DGG, you just see the article potential in drafts and what they could turn into! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:04, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, could you do me a favor and have a look at my report here? I seem to be getting no responses or willingness to act from admins, despite having pretty clear examples of disruptive behavior from this editor. As an addendum to that report, the IP has now started a new kind of vandalism: date changing. They're already doing this except with sourced quotes; changing words so they don't match the source, the latest example of that here. Eik Corell (talk) 14:02, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

No need to notify me of these, thanks. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 14:03, 14 October 2020 (UTC).

Rich, do you want to skip notifications for all empty categories? I've been asked by other editors who create a lot of categories to skip notifications to them and it's easy to do if that's what you'd prefer. Let me know. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:06, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

It's really only the albums categories. I created a lot of these, many years ago, some of them have had their albums (often only one album) recategorized as "non-notable" since, and are hence turning up empty. I don't have the time to investigate if the AfD/Prods that precede the cats becoming empty are well-founded, although I suspect that sometimes they aren't.

Most other cats I created are likely to relate to content I have curated, so I am more likely to make time to investigate.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough 20:54, 20 October 2020 (UTC).

Okay, will do, Rich. I didn't use to do all of the CSD C1 category tagging but I seem to be the only one now a days and it'll be easy to skip notifications for album categories. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:00, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 23:21, 21 October 2020 (UTC).

Can user:80.26.73.101 please be blocked ASAP. CLCStudent (talk) 13:57, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:02, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey Liz, hoping I can ask a favor: when you have a chance, can you delete my user subpage User:UnitedStatesian/CSD log/2020Q3? With all my CsD-ing the page got so big that any attempt to open it times out, so I can't put db-user onto it, and rather than bothering an entire noticeboard, I thought I'd ask a friendly admin. I have all the content split out into three other subpages, one for each month, so it's redundant. Thanks as always, UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:21, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done Wow, that took a long time to open! It was 1,068,784 bytes. I have had that happen with my CSD log, too. I need to cut my current one down as I'm doing more CSD C1 taggings these days...you must be busy with other tasks. Happy to do these kinds of requests! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:28, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Yes, I've moved into doing a lot in the draftspace: AfCs, G13s, etc. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:08, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, that's great, UnitedStatesian, we can't have too many editors working in AfC, there is usually quite a backlog there. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:12, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Can user:2601:603:5200:590:6167:2bb9:9e84:7901 please be blocked ASAP. CLCStudent (talk) 22:43, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done This was on a pretty obscure page that I doubt was on your Watchlist. How do you catch all of these vandals? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:45, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

I watch the Recent Changes page. CLCStudent (talk) 23:45, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Ah, well, that would be hard to keep up with! It's like a ticker tape. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:49, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Can user:103.25.248.225 please be blocked ASAP. CLCStudent (talk) 23:45, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:47, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Might I suggest you not tag FloridaArmy’s drafts for g13 while they are temporarily blocked? It’s insensitive and adds fuel to an unnecessary fire. Praxidicae (talk) 00:21, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 00:22, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Praxidicae and Drmies, I go down the list of stale drafts in Category:AfC G13 eligible soon submissions, check them for eligibility, tag them and delete them. I just check to make sure that the page is eligible for deletion and I don't ordinarily notice who created the draft so I think your accusation of insensitivity is not appropriate. I check hundreds of drafts a day and the only way I know who authored these pages is by looking at my own contributions to see where Twinkle posted a notice.

It's awkward to skip drafts when they are listed in order of 6 month period expiration. But I will honor your request. However, I'm not the only editor/admin who regularly tags & deletes these stale drafts. I think if it's not me, it will be another editor/admin who tags & deletes them. I can almost guarantee it. But since you asked, it won't be me for the length of his block. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:50, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

please reconsider tagging g13 in that case. I find it to be one of the more worthless but detrimental deletions on this project and it takes no time to check the draft history itself to see whether it’s an active editor. But tagging g13 on a temp blocked editor who contributes to meaningful content in an area we are lacking is...insensitive and does not benefit anyone. Please I delete those drafts at the very least and maybe be more conservative with the tag in the future. Praxidicae (talk) 00:57, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Checking who wrote the draft isn't a big hardship, right? Drmies (talk) 01:14, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Praxidicae, of course, it is not a hardship but there is no way for any editor or admin to keep track of which editors are blocked and which aren't. There is no master list of blocked editors that all admins can scan every morning before they edit. Well, there used to be such a list but it was wisely deleted long ago.

You seem to be thinking that how I handle G13s is different from that of other admins and editors. Look at User:SDZeroBot/G13 soon, next Friday, 233 drafts become eligible for G13 status (and there are 323 drafts becoming eligible tomorrow). So, yes, it does "take time" to look at each one and, honestly, I don't think all our editors tagging them for deletion look at them very closely. When I started working in this area a couple of weeks ago, we had over 5,000 drafts coming to their expiration date. Now, there are 1,873. We had a large, large backlog from activity in March and early April. A great number of these drafts were blank, had only a title and maybe one sentence. They were not promising.

If you are interested in how G13 stale drafts used to be handle, until recently, at 8 am UTC every morning, a list of stale drafts was posted at Wikipedia:Database reports/Stale drafts, and a number of rather enthusiastic editors would tag them all for deletion and they'd be deleted, en masse, by one of our admins who patrol CSD categories. I seriously doubt that our primary deleting admins examined hundreds of tagged drafts individually, they probably assumed the drafts had already been evaluated when tagged (and I don't think that has ever been true). See this page for an example of an old G13 database report and how the information used to be presented, for years, until mid-September.

Since September though, SDZeroBot has been able to provide much more detailed reports, evaluating the quality of drafts (from "promising" to "blank & unsourced"} and even sorting them according to subject area. It's been a big improvement over just having one list of links. And what is occurring now is that stale drafts are deleted throughout the day rather than all deleted at once between 9 am and 11 am UTC.

I have asked editors at

AfC to look at expiring drafts and pull out ones they think are promising. They are the pros at this. So far, despite there being HUNDREDS of editors working with AfC, only DGG

has done so on a consistent basis. And he's been rescuing old drafts for as long as I've been editing. I wish more editors at AfC would look at soon-to-be-expiring drafts but I can only encourage them to do so, they set their own priorities.

I would welcome your participation at looking at the hundreds of drafts reaching their expiration date every day and if you could spend time evaluating them and rescuing promising ones, that would be a great help! If you don't like how we treat G13s or you would prefer to have a longer dormant period than six months, Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) is thataway. I think this argument has been made several times over the years. It would also be beneficial to involve more editors and admins than just myself in this conversation. There is also a recent discussion at WT:CSD Notifications for G13 that you might want to look over.

If you want the viewpoint of someone more experienced than I in the subject, I recommend Primefac who knows more about the history here and I hope he won't mind me pinging him. He has offered some welcome comments on G13s when they've come up in recent discussions.

Again, if you want to get involved here, or Drmies, too, that would be awesome. Like I said, 323 stale drafts become eligible on October 17th UTC and we could use your help tomorrow and every day on this work. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:18, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

As for florida Army's drafts. I try to rescue as many of his as are worth rescuing. In the past they would submit minimal or sub-minimally referenced drafts, and never fix them, not even when challenged at AfD. Even though many of his topics were of interest to me, and the subjects potentially notable , I finally in frustration told him I would stop working on them unless he made more of an effort. Since then, he has been gradually making more of an effort, sometimes at first submission, and at least after they've been declined. I think he has cometno understand the problem, and I now will approve anything that is more than minimally sourced and that I think has a reasonable chance of showing notability. Even if minimally sourced, if I think there's a chance, I will comment on the draft to keep it from G13. (at least, I do this in the fields I understand, like early cinema; I cannot properly judge in fields I know nothing about.) I've justrealized he has been blocked, for an unrelated problem --a perfectly good block, btw, and not one where I would want to suggest unblocking .

As Liz says, we have ben making improvements in screening, many of them due to her interesti n the problem and her excellent work. Unfortunately, there many that no one person can do it--by now we have I think 3 or 4, and that still is not enough. My own practice to to look at he ones coming up at Category:AfC G13 eligible soon submissions and try to keep at least a few days ahead , with thegoal of getting as far ahead as possible. I work by hovering over each title in turn, and I think I can be counted on to catch the ones who are academics or businesspeople or politicians , and to a lesser degree, conventional visual artists or classical musicians , or companies, and historical figures . If I can immediately fix, I do, and accept (especially the ones that have neve een been reviewed at all) But I skip totally over everyone in sports or in popular music, or in journalism, unless by chance I recognize the name. I will usually skip over people in other geographies where I can not even judge the likely notability without research, particularly if the sources are in languages I cannot read at all. (I always look at apparent translations from French or German) And of course I skip over the ones written in nonEnglish languages, or personal junk. I would e very grateful if I could be assurred thatsomeone was keeping an eye on the categories I cannot handle.

I'm not quiteas sanguin as Liza about the effectiveness of the subject screening, and especially of the quality screening, which I think often too generous. But this complements what I do, and I'm very reassured she looks from those perspectives.

I have one particular request=--many drafts have been declined as needing merges. Sometimes they have been merged, sometimes not, sometimes it's unnecessary. At the moment I'm almost always just marking them: my priority is to have enough time to actually check and merge at tleast the simpler ones. I'm working on a list of the ones I think need it, so others can more easily help. And one matter I do not want to be specific about: if you've done much of this ,you'll have noticed a few reviewers whose work cannot be trusted. I do not want otmention maes, but you can compare notes offline. At least one of them, though tending to decline everythign 6 months ago, has now become more selective in their current work. The worst of these have some time ago been removed from the list, but if there are others, I can and will do so. But I want to try to teach them first. DGG ( talk ) 07:57, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

• This isn't a reply to DGG, just a new thought/thread to keep things a little separate since I was pinged to give my thoughts. On the one hand, I agree with Liz that checking for the creator of a draft before deleting via G13 is not exactly standard practice; if anything, seeing a blocked user would mean less to me than an unblocked user. Additionally, I cannot see a REFUND being denied to an editor who was temporarily blocked and unable to "save" their draft(s) from G13 deletion.

On the other hand, checking the providence of nominated drafts for a week because it was asked nicely (and the currently-blocked editor has a history of being ridiculous when "slighted") isn't totally unreasonable. I don't know if I can think of an upper limit to that time frame, though (i.e. a week is fine, a month is probably too long to keep track of).

So I guess the above is a hand-wavey way of saying that both the request and the reply are reasonable, but if Liz doesn't feel the need to perform the extra task as requested I don't think it reflects poorly on her. Primefac (talk) 12:44, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, Primefac & DGG. I appreciate your thoughts and opinions. I realized this morning that I need to step back from G13 tagging. It was just consuming so much of my time, many hours a day, which might be why I was a bit defensive. I felt like I was making a big contribution to the project and so the critique I've received over the past two weeks stung a bit. But it has influenced me positively, and I've adjusted how I work.

I think there are some valid concerns here with how we treat G13s that is worth initiating a discussion. I just think that this conversation is worth extending to the group of editors who regularly do CSD tagging as well as the admins who patrol these categories. There are admins who have been working in this area of the project for many more years than I have and it's worth including them in the discussion. I just am not sure on the best way to involve admins who spend their time deleting files and not on the discussion of practice on policy talk pages. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:03, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Liz, would you mind taking a look at 2020 California Proposition 16? I've been trying to mediate a content dispute there, but feel too involved to take action. A recently unblocked editor came back and restarted an edit war. I reverted and warned them. They participated on the talk page briefly, but now they're leaving misleading edit summaries. For example, claiming to format a table but looking at the edit, they don't introduce any table formatting, moved their preferred section above the other (like in the last edit), and edited a completely different section than the one implied; also they described an edit as a minor formatting change but actually removed sourced information. Seems obvious to me, but I don't want to look like I'm taking sides. Could you (or a talk page watcher) review and take necessary action? — Wug·a·po·des​ 00:26, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Wug·,

I'm in the midst of something right now but I'll check out the article and talk page later tonight. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:31, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, no rush. — Wug·a·po·des​ 00:32, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

It looks like this editor has been a major contributor to this article. I think some of their additions were fine, they aren't a vandal. Their edit summary was misleading though. I'll keep an eye on it for any potential edit-warring. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:17, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

I worked on the draft for Haris Stamboulidis professional soccer player. It was rejected because he hasn't played his first live game. He will be playing his first live game in soccer this season in two weeks. I need to get my original draft ready for republishing. Can you please find my draft. I saved it in this space.

Kind Regards Aphrodite Akarnikos (talk) 11:58, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Akarnikos,

I've restored it at Draft:Haris Stampoulidis. You should be able to work on it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:07, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi I'm trying to publish this article. Haris Stamboulidis is listed in this page as well https://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charalampos_Stamboulidis

What do I need to get it published Akarnikos (talk) 12:04, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Can you help me Akarnikos (talk) 12:05, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

(

WP:NFOOTY, but do not have a page on the English Wikipedia, please create them. If those individuals have pages in the Spanish Wikipedia, and you read Spanish well enough to translate, please read WP:Translation and translate them so those of us who don't read Spanish can benefit. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs

) 16:32, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

user:75.168.206.142 is abusing her talkpage. CLCStudent (talk) 16:47, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done It was pretty petty stuff but it's just a 31 hour block so I didn't feel bad extending it to her talk page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:50, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Liz. Have you got notifcations turned off, by any chance? Because you have nominated this category for deletion three times now, and each time I have replied to you but you have ignored. Please can you respond to these replies on my talk page? Thanks! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:25, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Please block user:221.126.237.98 ASAP. CLCStudent (talk) 03:27, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done, but I don't really think this case was urgent. Just standard, dumb, vandalism. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:30, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Liz, I'm still learning about writing articles on Wikipedia. Last July Nathan2055, moved an article I was drafting about Shannon Global Energy Solutions, and on Aug. 5, 2020, you deleted it. I realize why you deleted it; in hindsight, and with a critique from Jimfbleak, I see why the piece wasn't up to par or particularly encyclopedic. Jimfbleak restored the draft and suggested several edits, which I appreciate and have thanked him for. I've revised the entry and improved it. I'm certainly open to further input, but Jimfbleak suggested I now ask for a reviewer to look over Draft:Shannon Global Energy Solutions. Was I correct to add a COI statement to the talk page for this draft article and submit it for review? I want to follow the appropriate process. Thank you very much. Lakewood66 (talk) 17:24, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Lakewood66,

Looking at Draft:Shannon Global Energy Solutions, it looks like Jim deleted in August, not me. If you are talking about another page, can you provide me with the exact name or link so I can see why it was deleted?

Since you have submitted the draft for review, the folks at

AfC will be evaluating it and making suggestions. As for the COI disclosure, I think it's always best to be honest. Hiding paid editing can result in your work getting deleted. If the article gets approved, I'm not sure that the disclosure is necessary but the AFC reviewer could tell you that. Liz ^{Read! Talk!}

17:38, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Liz, I think disclosure of paid editing is not only necessary but mandated by the Wikimedia terms of use Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:01, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I see now on paid editing guidelines that this disclosure must be made on article talk pages as well as on the user pages which is where I have typically seen disclosures posted. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:28, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Liz! I'm Luke3227, nice to meet you! Luke3227 (talk) 18:15, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Luke3227,

Not sure how you found your way to my user talk page but welcome! I hope you enjoy editing on Wikipedia. If you have questions about editing, I know

the Teahouse helped me out a lot when I was starting out. Liz ^{Read! Talk!}

18:21, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{

ygm}} template.

--Kallichore (talk

Liz, I infer you're disagreeing with my choice to file AE complaints, but you also haven't commented on the content of my cases, just the formatting, so I don't know what your thoughts are there. My understanding is that if an editor is violating DS, we are to report them if discussions do not help. If they are warned and repeat the same behavior, we file another AE complaint. I would prefer to just edit article content without putting my neck on the chopping block, but it seems unfeasible to edit under these conditions. Kolya Butternut (talk) 22:55, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Kolya Butternut,

I realized that my comment wasn't addressing the substance of your argument but merely the filing of it so I removed it. It didn't aid in resolving the complaint and wasn't helpful. Luckily, I realized this just a few moments after posting it so I believe it was alright to remove it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:06, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I understand that, but that sounds like a non sequitor. Should I infer that you do not want to discuss your thoughts on how and when to use the AE process? Kolya Butternut (talk) 23:17, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Although one procedure I had considered was asking admins/AE to revert SPECIFICO's edit and place sanctions on the article, which would avoid sanctions against editors. However, that request puts me at risk of being accused of trying to win a content battle (but asking for an editor sanction puts me at risk of being accused of harassment). So my choices appear to be to walk away from the article voluntarily or complain and get banned from the article through ANI. I don't see how an RfC over an entire rewrite is going to work, unless the RfC is over which version to start building off of...but I'm not sure if that's a content issue or a noticeboard issue if it gets into litigating which version is the stable version. I thought thought I made the practical decision. Kolya Butternut (talk) 23:33, 21 October 2020

My thoughts are that filing frequent cases on the same editor usually isn't looked on kindly by admins commenting in AE and it can backfire. Unless it is egregious, admins don't want to respond to every little infringement of the discretionary sanctions but look for patterns of behavior where they can clearly see that a problem exists and what the proper sanction should be. My experience is that many admins are frustrated with complaints with ambiguous or borderline behavior infractions and can see it as a waste of their time to have to look at and weigh evidence they see as weak.

I'm not taking sides in your dispute but successful complaints don't come out of personal animosity towards another editor which is clear to anyone reading a case. They have evidence that indicates a clear cut pattern of violations and there are other editors who thoughtfully support your claims and offer statements. Unsuccessful cases are ones where the two sides can each point to misconduct of the other person, that just looks like a personal dispute and it is likely that in those cases both sides might receive sanctions.

But it ultimately comes down to how strong evidence is. Look at the meticulous case that Gorilla Warfare posted. Even though it is a well put-together complaint, coming from a respected editor/admin/arbitrator, some admins commenting just don't find it persuasively objectionable enough to warrant a sanction. You can have the formatting down right but if your evidence isn't strong enough to justify opening a case at AE, it's not worth spending the considerable time to put together a complaint. It's better to wait until you have stronger evidence or, better yet, find a way to resolve your dispute outside of a noticeboard. Just my 2 cents. Regarding your last specific request, I'd ask one of the more admins who frequent AE, this is not an area of admin activity I'm a regular at. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:45, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I understand how my cases look, but I don't agree that the evidence is unclear if it is examined, or that there is misbehavior on my part. I think that by not taking sides you are taking sides. That sounds harsh, but I can't blame you or others for not feeling safe here; it's a structural problem. Kolya Butternut (talk) 00:30, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{

ygm

}} template.

I noticed on your profile, there is a picture of you, and the caption says, "At WikiConUSA May 2014". What is Wiki con, and what do you do there? If you don't reply to this, that's understandable because, in my opinion, this is a kinda dumb question.

Hi,

Toad62

,

It's not a stupid question! WikiConUSA was the first North American Wikipedia Conference, held in NYC in May 2014. It later was decided to hold it as an annual event. Last year, it was held at MIT in Boston, MA in November 2019 and this year, it's going virtual. The plan was to hold it in Canada in November 2020 but due to the coronavirus, those plans have been put off a year.

I've gone to ones in 2014 and 2019. Typically, they last three days and there are about 400-500 people attending so it is smaller and more intimate than

WikiMania. There are different subject tracks of panels

but some folks come and edit almost the entire time, there's a room set aside just for editing. Others spend the time, not attending panels or editing, but networking and collaborating with other editors. It's really fun to personally meet editors you've only known by username. Most people do a mix of those three activities, editing, panels and networking. It's really up to you how you want to spend your time. There's almost always some planned activity in the community so last year, we got to several museums in Boston.

There's some information at WikiMedia's WikiConference NA page but the best source of information is at the WikiConference website. Volunteering, before or during a WikiConference, is a great way to get to know other editors and learn about event planning...volunteers, especially if you live in the conference city, are always needed and appreciated. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:14, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for telling me about it! I’ve never gone to any convention so I was very, very confused when I heard about this “wikicon”. It sounds kinda fun! Thanks for answering my question, stay safe!

talk

) 21:32, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh, I find conferences to be a lot of fun, especially if you have an interesting educational program that is well put together. I think one special element about WikiConferences and WikiManias are activities and parties scheduled after the day's program. At the last WikiMania, we had a closing party in an actual four story museum that we had all to ourselves where you could eat & dance or you could wander through the exhibition areas and be a museum nerd that ran until midnight! That's an experience you could never have outside of that conference. Travel costs can be expensive but WikiMedia has a good scholarship program set up and should you get the opportunity, I encourage you to go. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:25, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

hello,

thank you for your kind words. i appreciate your interjection.

it is upsetting to see a habitual edit-warring individual continue their conduct without any punishment.

what is especially bothersome is the fact they did not even read the sources and just involved themselves.

at what point do individuals who are "regulars" on

it certainly seems this user is in line for a slap on the hands? just spitballin' here. 75.152.205.229 (talk) 22:47, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, 75.152.205.229,

It's easy to get passionate when editing, especially on subjects you care about. I saw your edits because the article was on my Watchlist, I didn't look into the nature of the dispute you were involved in on the article talk page.

"Regulars" can be sanctioned for misconduct, if you look at

WP:ANEW. Liz ^{Read! Talk!}

23:07, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Liz. Can you explain why you deleted the Cantarito article, please? I was out with my wife drinking one, wanted to know what the ingredients were, and found that you'd deleted the article. Now I have no idea what I drank! If the Sazerac and the Negroni can have their own pages, why not the Cantarito?

Jalfrock (talk) 22:59, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Jalfrock,

Well, we have a policy of deleting pages created by sockpuppets and you can see here the editor was a sockpuppet. Apparently this is a case of long-term abuse because the account was globally locked which is only done for serious sockpuppetry. They contributed quite a few cocktail articles but most of them were very short and so are reproduceable.

This article was only three sentences long so I'll quote the relevant part here for you and your wife:

A cantarito is a tequila-based highball, paloma-like cocktail served in a clay cup known as a jarrito that helps keep the drink cold. It can contain ingredients such as agave, lemon juice, lime juice, grapefruit juice, orange juice, sea salt, and grapefruit soda (or lemonade or limeade).

That's it. I hope this answers both of your questions. If you run into other questions about deleted cocktail articles, just circle back here and I'll see if I can answer them. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey there, Liz! :)

You have set up for SD 2 of the categories I created some days ago. Those categories are needed for the CS1 module to work properly in EnWiki. I don't usually work in EnWiki. I'm an admin at SqWiki/SqQuote and I'm 90% of the time only active at those sites, mainly helping in technical aspects, mostly related to references and citations, so I might not know the exact needed category creation guidelines or templates to use here but I can assure you those categories are needed for the technical aspect of the said module. At least the one related to JFM is 100% needed, according to my current technical knowledge of that module. You can check here for more information.

However, if I'm wrong, feel free to delete them. I was just trying to "give something back", since 90% of my "contributions" on EnWiki are questions or requests for help related to SqWiki problems.

Take care! :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 15:05, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Klein Muçi,

I'm not sure what SqWiki/SqQuote is but thank you for your work. I'll mark these categories as "Empty categories", that is, categories that are empty at times. English Wikipedia doesn't normally allow for empty categories to exist unless they fall into a few, well-defined groups. I'm not familiar with CS1 but I'll take your word for it that these two categories serve a useful purpose and will be utilized. I'll untag them. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the jargon. SqWiki = Albanian Wikipedia, SqQuote = Albanian WikiQuote (EnWiki = English Wikipedia). With CS1 module, I mean this one. Its categories are located here. It's not unusual that its categories are empty at times because they are maintenance categories. What's unusual though is the lacking of description of those categories I've created (compared to other CS1 existing ones). Unfortunately I can't help with that part as I'm not quite familiar with the technical aspect myself. Hopefully some more-than-me tech savvy user will come and put their needed descriptions (and by doing so will also help me in return to know what to write in the Albanian homologue categories). - Klein Muçi (talk) 16:33, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation, Klein Muçi. I only know enough technical aspects of Wikipedia to get my daily routine of tasks done. I wish I understood scripts better because I have added a lot and I'm not sure if they are all that useful. I'd like to know more about modules and bots but right now, that is beyond my ability. Thanks for coming over from Albanian Wikipedia to help out here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:45, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I would offer to help in that sector but I think you can find users at EnWiki a lot more informed than me. At the Albanian communities I'm one of the few who looks after the said sector but most of my knowledge there comes just by asking for help here so... :P Thanks for the kind words! :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 17:00, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello there, an article on musician Yazmin Aziz got a speedy delete and I think I might be able to rewrite in a way that does a more effective job of establishing notability for the subject per

I can't figure out what is going on here, TheMusicExperimental. You've written an article on an article talk page and on the article page there is a tag for speedy deletion. Can you give me a link to the page that was deleted so I can see why it was deleted? If you've created a new article on top of a deleted article page, it's difficult to recover the original page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:30, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Original article is most definitely not mine. It was made by sbsalam. Near as I can tell, they made an article and published it, it got hit with a speedy deletion (which, based on the way it was written, I can understand). Somewhere in there the content was put on the Talk page and the talking ended up on the Article page and so on. What I'm trying to do is make a draft version of Yazmin Aziz so I can rework from the citations available and was just going to copy the content into a draft and start working on it. The original Article, I think, is here: [[6]], the actual content I want to paste over and rewrite is here: [[7]], and the draft I'd like to paste it into is here: [[8]]. The original author might be even more inexperienced than I am so I figured if I tried to wade through this part it would be easier to see what can be done to established notability on this subject. Thanks for your insight and time. TheMusicExperimental (talk) 02:38, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

So, what was the page that I deleted that you had questions about? That's what I'm puzzled about. I need to look at the deleted page to see why it was deleted. In some cases (G13s & PRODS), it's easy to restore a deleted article but if it was deleted due to an AfD, BLP or copyright issues, it should not be restored. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:44, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

I think the one you deleted was the draft, it says G8? [9]TheMusicExperimental (talk) 02:46, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Def don't want the original restored, just looking for a clean path to rewrite in a draft mode.TheMusicExperimental (talk) 02:47, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Ah, this explains it. Draft:Yazmin Aziz was moved to Yazmin Aziz, then it was deleted, and I deleted the redirect from Draft:Yazmin Aziz to Yazmin Aziz. I delete a lot of broken redirects. Admin Jimfbleak deleted Yazmin Aziz on grounds of G11 or Unambiguous advertising or promotion. Within hours, Sbsalam, who created the original article, started recreating it. And so it's been tagged for deletion again.

Since it seems like Sbsalam is invested in this draft article, if you want to create a new one, I'd start a new draft on a differently-titled page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:56, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Ahhh that makes sense. I'll work on a separate version and see how it goes. I just didn't want to create a problem with page moving etc. Thanks for taking a look! TheMusicExperimental (talk) 03:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

TheMusicExperimental, I'm not a content editor but I would recommend you look over the current draft and see if there are any reference you can use, to write a less promotional article. Sometimes the sources are decent, it's the text that is weak. Good luck! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:15, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

WP:NMUSIC. TheMusicExperimental (talk

) 03:22, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, I've whacked the repost, warned the editor again, and also warned a new account that removed the SD tag for doing that and possible socking Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:49, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

On the bolivia page, there is one editor who has been edit-warring and deleting info using biased reasoning https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Crmoorhead . The info that he deletes are solid and well backed by sources. So naturally, I undelete what he did and remind him that the info is well backed by sources.

He then undo my work in which I reply to him to please take it to the talk page. I ask him to take it to the talk page as I am certain that he knows that I am right but he doesn't take it to the talk page. Reason that he doesn't take it to the talk page is that he knows I'm right and he can't bs me. So instead, he makes a new section with arbitrary external reasons on the admin noticeboard with the intent to remove me instead. And ironically accuses me of edit-warring despite I had considered reporting him but I have no idea where to start.

I am not good with apologies but I will admit that maybe I was overly harsh on Materialscientist after he deleted all my edits but it was just a misunderstanding. He had assumed I was a vandal and undid all my work. And I accused him of being excessive in his actions and I should have handled it better. But after that one conflict, an external user Crmoorhead has had a grudge against me and hates me because I refuse to let him delete real info from Bolivia's page. He should be the one blocked for doing so and Wikipedia needs people like me to ensure people don't delete info they hate. This is my contribution history - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/49.180.129.245

Don't know where to start but you seem like you know the ropes. Can you help or point me to the right direction - I would like to request an investigation in the both of us -(me and Crmoorhead) and freely invite impartial people to determine who is the REAL VANDAL and who is the one opposing the vandalism. I am the latter hence I welcome such a review as I believe THAT is the real conflict between me and Crmoorhead.49.180.129.245 (talk) 06:54, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Technical question for you: is this considered routine removal of unwanted comments, or are these comments considered part of the unblock request, especially since they were cited by the reviewing admin? I'm not particularly concerned about seeing my comment restored, but I am curious if that input is covered by the exception to

AFAIK, only the declined unblock request itself counts. Even proceeding comments from the admin who declined the request don't count. If they were relevant to the unblock request then the admin should have mentioned them when declining the request. An admin reviewing any subsequent request will therefore know to check out the history if they feel it matters to their review. The only time I can imagine comments other than the declined request being unremovable is when they are follows ups because the admin forgot to mention something or whatever but is unwilling to modify that request. Even in that case, it would IMO be better if the admin simply annotates the request. Nil Einne (talk) 07:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

P.S. I guess there may be some concerns about how easy it will be for a subsequent admin to realise there are other comments when some of them were deleted but others weren't but the declining admin quiet reasonably simply mentioned comments below or something similar. I think answer to that would still be that the admin should preemptively check if they really feels it matters to them. Having the declined request there as a baseline so reviewing admins know how many previous ones there were, and what was said as a quick check, is sufficiently important to override the principle that editors can delete comments on their own talk page if they really want to. But if the reviewing admin feels they need more info they may need to check. (This includes for AN//I discussions etc too.) Definitely whenever I've been in discussions surrounding deletion of comments in OWNTALK cases any exceptions have been treated very narrowly. Even the declined exception can be controversial especially if it's been a while and the editor has retired/decided to leave and not appeal for now. I assume most admins do a quick check of the history anyway since the exception could easily be violated, so frankly most editors deleting comments simply harm their case. Still if it's what they want to do excluding those exceptions, it's better to let them rather than fight it. Nil Einne (talk) 08:11, 26 October 2020 (UTC)-

AFAIK, only the declined unblock request itself counts. Even proceeding comments from the admin who declined the request don't count. This is what I had always assumed,

WP:OWNTALK and it made me genuinely curious about how admins view it. Grandpallama (talk

) 15:30, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

pointy

.

Unless you work in a small, niche area, at some point every editor on Wikipedia runs into other editors who take issue with their edits and, if polite, they ask for explanations. If not so polite, you get angry editors posting on your talk page. If an editor is going to be editing here for any length of time without being brought to

ANI

, you have to find a way to respond to criticism other than "F-u!". While Telsho had the right to remove your comment from their talk page, I was trying to make the point that they would have a better chance of being unblocked if they didn't just delete every remark that was critical of them. Their chance of being unblocked would be enhanced by responding to criticism with an explanation or counter-argument. But there is only so much you can convey in an edit summary.

So, my action wasn't in my capacity as an admin enforcing a rule or policy but more as an advisory comment. I apologize if that wasn't clear to you or Telsho. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:15, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

No apology sought or needed; like I said, I'm not poking around to complain about policy violations one way or the other, but I was just curious if the exception policy was broader than I had thought. I don't think you did anything problematic by restoring the comments, nor did he by removing them (although I agree with you that a history of blanking criticism doesn't help with unblocking). Thank you for clarifying your thinking, though; I appreciate it. Grandpallama (talk) 18:29, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Liz,

Thanks for all the work you do to make wikipedia a resource that can grow and change with the community (all of us).

I recently posted a new draft of this wiki page for Michael Colby: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Michael_Colby, and it would be great if you could post the article now that the sources have been updated and problematic content edited out.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki Lit Editor (talk • contribs) 20:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Wiki Lit Editor,

Thanks for the compliment but I have no association with your draft, your work or any "problematic content".

I advise you to submit it to

Articles for Creation for review. It looks good to me but I'm not a content expert. You could try moving it directly into the main space of the project but this is something you can do yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!}

21:07, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I have just seen that you have deleted this page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Motor_Film_Awards). It was originally removed in February for not having enough suitable references, so the new page was built with a lot more references and irrelevant ones thinned down. Instead of just removing it, can you feedback on how it could be improved? Thank you! Joshmayer84 (talk) 01:55, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Joshmayer84,

If you look at the deleted page, International Motor Film Awards, you can see the reason for the deletion was that it was seen as the recreation of an article that had been deleted through a deletion discussion (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Motor Film Awards for the discussion). The deletion discussion will give you some idea of the problems the editors saw in the original version of the article that was deleted.

If you would like, I could move your version of the page to your user sandbox so that you could continue to improve upon it. But if you then move it directly into the main space of Wikipedia, it will be deleted again. You'll have to submit it to

Articles for Creation and get a reviewer's approval to make sure it is an improvement over the deleted version. Liz ^{Read! Talk!}

02:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Liz! Yeah I saw the deletion discussion page with the reasons, but this was back in February. While the page may appear similar/a duplicate to the initially deleted one, it has been greatly improved, with legitimate sources such as newspapers added. I'm still new to Wikipedia so still learning sorry. Thank you... I will try to improve it more and submit it to Articles for Creation for approval. Joshmayer84 (talk) 02:26, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Liz, please can you move that page to my sandbox to continue working on it? Thank you! Joshmayer84 (talk) 21:00, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Joshmayer84,

I have moved the article to User:Joshmayer84/Sandbox. Do NOT move it back to main article space without revisions or it will be deleted and, in this case, not restored again. Good luck! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:30, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{

ygm

}} template.

Hi Liz

You reverted this edit of mine [10]

The content I removed at WP:ANI was posted by DePiep into the middle of my content. In a previous edit at WP:ANI, DePiep objected to my postings inside his content, and reverted them, along with a request to cease and desist, which I subsequently respected.

By inserting his post into my content at WP:ANI, DePeip breached a standard of conduct he expected of me. I therefore removed his content, along with a comment: "remove interference by DePiep in my post" [11], which I trust you saw.

I posted a warning to DePiep about this at WP:ANI, here [12].

I intend to revert your revert.

WP:ANI is stressful. When you revert me without doing due diligence, that adds to my stress. In future, as an Amin especially, I ask you to take the time to do due diligence, especially at WP:ANI, before reverting.

I've attempted to stay stay cool; not be a jerk or a drama mama; and assume good faith. --- Sandbh (talk) 06:06, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Sandbh,

Do not remove or edit other editors' talk page or noticeboard comments unless a) they are personal attacks, b) they violate

WP:BLP or c) they are copyright violations. "Interference" is not a justifiable reason to remove another editor's comment. Liz ^{Read! Talk!}

17:43, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{

ygm

}} template.

Thank you Liz, for your prompt response. Pardon me, it looks like a "cookie-cutter" reply, that does not take account of the background to my question, as I set out above.

Does this mean that another editor can post comments inside my posts?

As I noted above:

"By inserting his post into my content at WP:ANI, DePeip breached a standard of conduct he expected of me. I therefore removed his content, along with a comment: "remove interference by DePiep in my post" [13], which I trust you saw."

If if is indeed that case that it's OK for an editor to post inside another editor's post at WP:ANI, I'll add this to the draft of the WP:ANI protocol I intend to develop.

best regards, Sandbh (talk) 00:16, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

This was coming up for G13 but I found it potentially valuable and edited it 21 October. Nevertheless, you deleted it 28 October (I then got a

Hello, Kvng,

No, you didn't misunderstand. You did everything correctly. I made a mistake. Dealing with G13 eligible drafts has become a bit more complicated recently.

There are several locations that G13 eligible/eligible soon drafts are listed: Category:AfC G13 eligible soon submissions, User:SDZeroBot/G13 soon and Wikipedia:Database reports/Stale drafts. In the past, we have relied on the G13 eligible soon category but as you can see in this discussion, there are problems with this category right now. It is supposed to include all drafts becoming eligible in 5-6 months and in the past it contained between 2,000-5,000 aging drafts. Now, it has about only 450 drafts. So, for some reason, aging drafts are not being placed in this category.

So, I have relied more on pages put together by SDZeroBot which lists around 200-300 G13 drafts each day. But using this list means that I need to double-check the edit history of each draft to ensure it is eligible. I've noticed that between you and DGG, you remove about 20 stale drafts from upcoming G13 drafts each day and I have caught almost all of them but apparently I didn't notice that your recent edit to

Draft:List of known cases of COVID-19 in the United States

which would disqualify it from being eligible. As far as I know, this is the only one I have missed.

I apologize for the inconvenience of you needing to request its undeletion from REFUND. If you find I've made an error like this in the future, please come to me, I'll look into it and restore it if I've made a mistake. I'm very careful with drafts but these days I'm looking at between 200-300 G13 eligible drafts each day and there is a possibility that I'll make a mistake. Honestly, I'm not sure how much longer I'll be dealing with G13s because without a reliable Category:AfC G13 eligible soon submissions, it has turned into quite a lot of work. I hope we can find out why the G13 category system isn't working as well as it has in the past. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:39, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Liz. Just a quick question about this edit. I did prod the soundtrack album's cover art for deletion and since it was deleted I get removing the file's syntax and caption from the infobox. However, I'm not sure why you removed the entire infobox itself. Not complaining about its removal; just curious as to why. For reference, you did the same at The Elephant Man (film) and The Five Heartbeats. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:34, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

I removed the infobox because the image was the bulk of the infobox. But I'll replace them, without the image, and you can work on them. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:37, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. I was just curious as to whether there had been some recent RfC or something about using infoboxes without images. I'm OK if the removal is a case of

WP:DISINFOBOX and that seems to be the case with these articles. To be honest, I didn't really think about whether an infobox was needed when I prodded the files for deletion. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 01:44, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

No, no RfC, no big policy change. Just an editing choice, it turns out, probably the wrong one on my part. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:47, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

I noticed you deleted the Mann + Hummel article that I had started for being unambiguously promotional. I have included the links to articles in other languages that you may want to delete as they have been written along the same lines. I started the article because they had been linked in another article so I thought I would help get the article started but apparently I was wrong. Please let me know how the article was promotional and was unable to replaced with neutral language as I am sure you know this, that is preferable to deletion.

• https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mann%2BHummel
• https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mann%2BHummel
• https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mann%2BHummel
• https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mann%2BHummel

Mrtrey99 (talk) 22:13, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Mrtrey99,

Do you have a link to the deleted article page? I delete a lot of pages every day. Then I can look over the content.

Administrators have no power on other language Wikipedias so I'm just a regular editor on those Wikipedias. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:44, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mann%2BHummel

Thanks, that helps. What I see is a brief paragraph and then a couple listings of the company that are just mentions. There is no coverage over the company by reliable sources, no articles about the company or its founders in mainstream or business journals or newspapers. If you think you can find some significant coverage, more than just mentions, I will put the content on one of your user pages and you can work on improving it. But if you move the page back into the encyclopedia, it will be deleted again. It's been deleted twice not for the same reason. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:19, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

To be honest I would rather not contribute anything to a project that makes it so easy for things to be deleted. It is far less work to delete things than to make things better, so I will just not contribute. Good luck deleting information. Mrtrey99 (talk) 19:33, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel that way, Mrtrey99, but perhaps another platform like a blog would be more appropriate for this content.

I don't know if it is "easy" for things to be deleted, there has to be a justification for deletion, some of which you can find at

Criteria for Speedy Deletion. We don't delete pages willy nilly. We do when they don't meet our standards of content. Liz ^{Read! Talk!}

23:12, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Mrtrey99, I don't use batch-delete after trying it out and finding problems with it. And, in your total 7 edits over the last 3 weeks, 6 of them have been to my talk page so you can't say you are spending your time improving articles, you are just posting about your annoyance with me. I said that I would restore the article to your sandbox but you didn't want that so I'm not sure what your objective is here.

Any future comments here that are just maligning me and not constructive or about editing the project will be removed. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:02, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

I typically only add content when there is a gap in the information on Wikipedia. You are not the first deletionist that I have encountered and been discouraged by. I started contributing to Wikipedia in 2004 when stubs were encouraged and welcome. No more, the deletionists make sure no new articles go unturned. One day Wikipedia will reach its perfection and be a single article.

Here and the related ones. I didn't realize there were extant redirects from the old name. StarM 00:08, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Star Mississippi,

I'm not sure what pages you are referring to but I do delete a fair number of broken redirects. Glad it helped! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:24, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Twelve years in.. I still can't make wiki links consistently. LOL. This is why I should stay in simpler lanes StarM 02:29, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

How is a user page that says "I's back bitches" appropriate? Not angry, just wondering.The one and only

You may not like the language used but that is not an attack page against anyone. It doesn't fit the criteria for an attack page according to

CSD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!}

02:49, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Seven years!

treats on my talk today, - thank you for pumpkins! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:21, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Gerda. Happy Halloween! And it's a blue moon tonight too...the last blue moon on Halloween was on Oct. 31, 1944. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 13:20, 31 October 2020 (UTC)