User talk:Sdrqaz/Archive 4

Hi there. I don't often read

Hi User:MZMcBride. Well, those are some pretty strong words! Would you be so kind as to be more specific about where I went off the rails, so that I may learn and grow and avoid such errors in future? Thanks. Herostratus (talk) 06:33, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

We have been pretty specific in the talk page discussion on the rfa already, you told him that he didnt need to respond if he didnt want too, and then went back and said 'Why didnt you respond". Thats not an ok thing to do. PerryPerryD Talk To Me 14:11, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Well... "you don't have to respond if you don't want to" is pro forma politeness, intended to destress and grease the wheels of intercourse. Candidate is already stressed by going thru an RfA currently, I want to bend over backwards be polite and not sound contentious or threatening. Do you think I should not do that.

"If you don't mind, would you please get off my foot" is not to be taken literally and responded to with "nah, I'm good", and if it is a reply of "Get off my foot right now" would not be considered out of line. If you know this and are just being contrary, please don't do that. If you don't understand how politeness works, well, I suggest you need to work on that.

And I mean it is literally true that candidate could not be forced to respond. That is true regardless of whether I was impolite or not. So why be rude for no reason, and anyway honey is better than vinegar. It doesn't mean that I think it was OK for them to actually not reply. I don't.

User:Sdrqaz, as an admin, may I suggest you will need think about controlling your talk page more than you are accustomed to and make sure people like this aren't answering posts in what people might consider your voice. Of course most lurker posts are OK, but we all have to do this occasionally ("Mr Smith, please don't answer for me" / "Mr Smith doesn't speak for me, what I think is..." / or even "Mr Smith, please stay off my talk page"). And as admin, well... people... and so, something to consider I think. Sdrqaz, if you'd be kind enough to please disavow User:PerryPerryD's statement, that would would be great, thanks. Herostratus (talk) 01:51, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

So, Because i called you out for your general rudeness, you decide to call for admin attention to remove my statement? You ever hear of something called a boomerang? PerryPerryD Talk To Me 02:06, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't think your statement should be removed, but disavowed. I don't think I was rude, I mean what I said was

Hi. You're doing very well, you're a fine editor and we all look forward to as an addition to the admin corps. Hopefully you're not stressed. But... I hate to be "that guy", but I had a pertinent question about the photo on your user page. There's a thread on the RfA talk page if you want to chime in (you don't have to of course). Again, congrats.

How the gosh dark heck could I have been any more polite and gentler than that short of not raising the question at all (which we are allowed and expected to raise pertinent questions at RfA, even if the candidate is a fine editor and candidate)? Educate me, please. Herostratus (talk) 02:22, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Herostratus, I will not lie to you. I felt misled. It is entirely possible that this is a misunderstanding due to the limitations of text-based communication, but being explicitly told that I do not have to respond to something, then being opposed for doing exactly that, is confusing. I wish the message had been clearer and I wish that the heart of your note had not been obscured by "pro forma politeness". Given that you had not used your two-question quota, being asked it in the "questions" section of the RfA would have been even better to clarify your intentions, but what is done, is done. Sdrqaz (talk) 10:23, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Note: See Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Sdrqaz § Regarding provenance of photo on candidates' talk page and these edits at User:Sdrqaz.

Looking at this !vote ratio, along with the half-baked attempts of oppose discussions, I believe that, not to jump the gun here, your adminship is pretty set in stone. Congratulations. PerryPerryD Talk To Me 17:54, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

A good drink for a good wikipedian. PerryPerryD Talk To Me 17:55, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Coincidentally, I just had some today. Thanks! Sdrqaz (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Note: Part of the message was titled "Congratulations"; this heading was removed and merged into the subsequent message.

It seems the tone of your RfA is much worse than one would hope for. It understandably is causing you a lot of wikistress so here's a sleepy kitten! It's finally good weather here in NL so I hope it's good weather where you are so you can enjoy nature a bit to ground you from the heightened emotions. As a USSC nerd I really appreciate your work on shadow docket, hope to see more of that type of content from you in the future :) Feel free to ping me if you need anyone to peer-review legal articles you work on.

Thank you,

A. C.. The weather here's been reasonable and I'm glad I had the chance to spend a few hours outdoors a few times this week. I think there's certainly still some work left on that piece – as I wrote in my answer to Q13, hopefully one day the scholarship will catch up with the "popular" media. Thanks for the offer! Sdrqaz (talk

) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

How can I be sure you aren't HU or Jinsoo? Everybody around here is pseudonymous anyhow. Well, if you are one of them, thanks for showing up. This joint could use more class. Bruce leverett (talk) 20:12, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

As I vaguely hinted above, I have wondered if Galobtter is actually a gorilla. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:48, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

An early congrats - you're in the home stretch now! GABgab 02:42, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, GAB . I hope that I'll bump into you at SPI one day. Sdrqaz (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

It’s safe to say there’s no Jupiter stopping the inevitable, hence allow me congratulate you in advance on your successful RFA. Furthermore I note what you did (or said) in the comment section in which you show your dissatisfaction about the bickering amongst editors and reprimand even those supporting you & this is precisely why you’d make a great sysop in my opinion. I !voted for you because I believe you’d be helpful against tackling less than ethical practices such as COI editing and your response to my question confirmed my thinking. Please do not let me down and do well to indeed fight against unethical practices as you have promised to. Oh well, congratulations once more on your successful RFA in advance. . Celestina007 (talk) 12:05, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

It's on a knife-edge to get across the line to

WP:RFX200 ... fingers crossed .... Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)}

12:47, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Ritchie333, lmao, I’m just seeing this 😂. But yup in the end they got the mop. Celestina007 (talk) 17:12, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Celestina. It probably wasn't the "smartest" thing to do politically, but I felt that I would regret it if I didn't. I will continue acting against spam and unethical practices, as I did before my RfA. Sdrqaz (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

@Celestina007: It's safe to say there's no Jupiter stopping the inevitable... what, you wanna tempt the wrath of The Whatever, high atop The Thing? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 08:08, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Theleekycauldron, you followed the west wing too? Is it awkward that my favorite character was Josh Lyman yeah but nahhh we definitely do not wanna tempt the wrath of The Whatever, high atop The Thing. In retrospect, Sdrqaz knows I love her but she must have seen that comment and be like “damn is Celestina effing crazy” . Celestina007 (talk) 21:54, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

@

about everywhere :D) i'm very excited, i've not seen a wingnut around the here in a while! (and no, i don't think it's awkward, except that my favourite is probably either toby or C. J., ahaha) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they

) 00:13, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: There was a recent poll that said that The West Wing is considered the most realistic American political show, which I thought was interesting. Sdrqaz (talk) 22:32, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

i saw that! I think it's more... the least realistic American political show, except for all the others. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 22:38, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Haven't thought about it in that way! I think it's certainly not as cynical as the other ones. Sdrqaz (talk) 20:08, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Celestina007: Not crazy, but you definitely have a way with words that I don't have! Sdrqaz (talk) 22:32, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Sdrqaz, you definitely have a way with words that I don't have! do I take this to be a compliment? . Celestina007 (talk) 19:19, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

I meant it as one, yes: I'm not as creative when writing messages . Sdrqaz (talk) 20:08, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

You’re just so adorable 💗. Celestina007 (talk) 23:04, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Note: Two messages from Thryduulf and Ad Orientem, and their subsequent responses, were moved from this section to § Welcome to the admin common room.

Please bring your own biscuits.

I have a little bit of tidying up to do, but you are now an admin and can use the tools. Welcome on board. SilkTork (talk) 15:13, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome, SilkTork. I could've sworn that the RfA was closed early, though ... Were they that eager for me? /j Sdrqaz (talk) 18:57, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

• Congratulations Sdrqaz! A well-deserved entry into
  WP:200 🙂 and @SilkTork: I was just about to tidy away Sdrqaz's now redundant user rights, but I assume you'll get them while you're here? ~TNT (talk
  • she/her) 15:17, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

  TNT, feel free to do that. I've got a couple of pings and emails to deal with at the moment. SilkTork (talk) 15:21, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

  @SilkTork: All done, happy to help ✨ ~TNT (talk • she/her) 15:27, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

  Thank you, TNT, I rights-conflicted with you. I was hoping to insert a humorous reference to File:Lolrollback.jpg in my rights log, but was foiled! Sdrqaz (talk) 18:57, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

• Congratulations! --Victor Trevor (talk) 15:19, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks, Victor . Sdrqaz (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

• Congratulations Sdrqaz, welcome aboard! If you have any questions, my talk page is always open. You can also ping me on IRC. -- LuK3 (Talk) 15:41, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks, LuK3! I'll stop poking you for revdel now, though you'll still have to deal with the Oversight ... I'll be sure to ask when I have something. Sdrqaz (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

• Congratulations for adminship! I hope you have a good run.
  talk
  ) 15:44, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks,

  Thingofme . Sdrqaz (talk

  ) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

• Congratulations Sdrqaz. Unfortunately I missed the RfA and certainly would have supported if I had noticed. --Ferien (talk) 15:45, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks, Ferien. I'll add you as the honorary 203rd support . Sdrqaz (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

• Glad to see you on this side of RfA. Enjoy a Vesper on me, I owe you after talking you into it. Give me a shout if you have any questions. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 15:48, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks for getting me to where I am now, Blade. Shouldn't I be the one sending you some ? When I have questions, I'll come knocking. Sdrqaz (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

• Congratulations! Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 16:25, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks, The4lines . Sdrqaz (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

• Congratulations and apologies for being one of the following who badgered the opposition. I'd like to say in all honesty most of the opposes weren't granted and not necessary at all. SoyokoAnis - talk | PLEASE PING 17:40, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

  Thank you, SoyokoAnis. What's done is done and I'm certain you debated them with the best intentions. Sdrqaz (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

• Congrats! Dont forget to add the Administrators topicon or userbox to prevent confusion :) PerryPerryD Talk To Me 19:45, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks, Perry. I think I'll be making a userbox of my own soon. Sdrqaz (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

• 

  Enjoy the extra buttons Cabayi (talk) 20:59, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

  I don't think I'll ever get used to having so many, Cabayi. If only they were all chocolate ... Sdrqaz (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

• Congratulations, a thoroughly deserved membership of the 200 club too! Thryduulf (talk) 22:41, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

  I didn't think I'd get there, Thryduulf. I thought I'd get 150 or so, with maybe 180 as a target ... Thank you for encouraging and helping me before it. I will continue asking questions and listening. Sdrqaz (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

• Congratulations on the mop! I knew you'd be a good candidate.
  talk
  ) 23:12, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks,

  Scorpions13256 . Sdrqaz (talk

  ) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

• Felicitations... -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:15, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

  Thank you, Ad Orientem. I was surprised that you were impressed by me before the event – I thought I had kept a relatively low profile! Sdrqaz (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

  I tend to lurk a lot, even in areas where I am not particularly active. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:27, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

  Curiously, I find myself doing that more and more, sometimes reading through historical Committee cases. My work with the Oversight team also usually doesn't leave traces on-wiki. Sdrqaz (talk) 19:49, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

• A belated congratulations! Sorry I was not able to respond as I was autoblocked (curse you, username policy violations!). May you enjoy your service with the mop! — 3PPYB6 — TALK — CONTRIBS — 19:03, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks, 3PPYB6. Those pesky things! Sdrqaz (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Note: Two messages from Thryduulf and Ad Orientem, and their subsequent responses, were moved to this section from § Congratulations On Your RFA. Three messages from SoyokoAnis (titled "Congratulations!"), PerryPerryD and Cabayi (titled "Congrtatulations!"), and their subsequent responses, were moved to this section; these headings were removed and merged into the previous messages.

Hi, thanks for this. Your edit summary said to carry out the move, but when I try to move the page to "Ginni Thomas" I get the following message: The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. Still not 100% sure how moves entirely work so I'm not sure what the correct thing to do is. Thanks. Endwise (talk) 12:04, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

@Endwise: Oh, how silly of me. I've now deleted the redirect blocking your move. My mistake; it should be fine to carry out now. Thanks for letting me know. Sdrqaz (talk) 12:09, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Ahh, I see. Thanks! Endwise (talk) 12:13, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Oh, migosh! Outrageous! A new admin that admits error and even thanks the messenger for pointing it out! What's the opposite of "trout"? For my part, I didn't !vote in the latest RfA. Not because I didn't care. Not because I have any wiki-ambition to clerk or crat. I forgot the process's close. D'oh! Please understand I have abundant confidence in the successful candidate and would have jumped in if my support would have made any difference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BusterD (talk • contribs) 22:13, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

I did mean what I said in Q3. Thanks, Buster. I'll add you as the honorary 204th support after Ferien above, then. Sdrqaz (talk) 22:32, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Kidding, kidding, congrats on the RFA. Just FYI, if you are going to work PERM or other noticeboards

That's an ... eye-opening message to come online to! Thanks,

Beeblebrox; my RfA was an experience. I did consider it in my initial wave of administrative scripts, but hesitated because I don't think it allows for multiple responses at once. There's a lot of variation in RfPP templates, so am considering it mainly for that venue. Sdrqaz (talk

) 22:32, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Note: Message was regarding my comment at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Confirmed.

The RfA process is a shitty one and I hate opposing even at the best of times, doubly so when the motive for my oppose is not actual concern that the candidate lacks what it takes to be an admin but the meta concern that a bona fide issue isn't being taken seriously in the RfA. While I don't regret my oppose, I do regret the less than ideal wording, so I apologise for that. I do have confidence that you will be a good admin. I also have respect for the tactful way you criticised badgering of opposes. — Charles Stewart (talk) 19:23, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Charles, I think that the community does take copyright violations seriously, as it demonstrated less than a week before my RfA. I think where you and other voters disagreed was whether the image in question was actually a copyright violation. I appreciate the clarification that libel was not an issue for me and the apology, and am doubly appreciative of your kind comments. I hope that we can work together in some capacity soon. Take care, Sdrqaz (talk) 19:42, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm generally OK with how the community treats copyvios; in fact, I think WP could do with loosening up a bit about fair use, cf. User:DGG#Copyvio. (I'm less happy with community enforcement of BLP policy: there we could do with substantial tightening up). I did catch that the image was eventually shown to be free; the issue was that reasonable doubt was cast on our basis for classing the image as free. What led to my oppose was the "nothing to see here" attitude when there was a bona fide cause for concern about our processes. — Charles Stewart (talk) 20:10, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

I see, Charles. I think we could do with greater BLP enforcement too (see Q1 and Q9), for what it's worth. Sdrqaz (talk) 22:32, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Sdrqaz, I'm sorry I never completed your review. It looks like you didn't need it though! Congratulations on the successful RfA! Very well done! Real life got in the way, and I was away from Wikipedia for a very long time. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:55, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry I didn't wait for you, Hammersoft, but am glad to hear back from you – I was getting worried that something untoward might have happened. My RfA had quite a good top-line (although I am responsible for all the opposes this year out of the four successful RfAs), but wasn't wonderful below the surface: this section has a bit on the main sticking point. Hope you and your loved ones are doing well, Sdrqaz (talk) 13:52, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

You certainly had no obligation to wait for me. It is I who is and should be apologetic to you for not following through on my promised intent. I am a person of my word, and it hurt me to have to not complete your review. Life very much got in the way in a rather big way. Things are starting to get back to a more even keel, but things are still...wonky. Re your RfA: People find the silliest things on which to oppose sometimes. I'm aware of at least a few people who are admins who do not pass their own criteria. That's a sad bit of hypocrisy. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:45, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Sometimes our best-laid plans go to naught, Hammersoft. I'm certainly not going to blame you for things beyond your control . I'm happy to hear that things are stabilising, though. As for the RfA, the optimist in me takes some satisfaction that none of the concerns were based on administrative competence. Being told that I had a fundamental misunderstanding of CSDs or revision deletion would have been a blow. Part of why I waited three months from being asked to transclusion (apart from avoiding clashes and others) was that I needed to be confident that I was in a position where I would have voted for myself. I won't hide the fact that I am a little harsher than the median voter at RfA. Sdrqaz (talk) 11:59, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Sorry if I'm missing something but it's not clear why you have removed the IP address and edit summary here, but done nothing with the edit itself? Having seen the original edit I don't see anything that needs suppressing? GiantSnowman 15:11, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: I have now removed the content as well (thank you for reminding me). I can only assure you that the revision deletion was within policy and all will become clear soon. I'm sorry I cannot be any more forthright. Sdrqaz (talk) 15:18, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

I look forward to finding out the reason for this... GiantSnowman 15:45, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

@

cloak-and-dagger nature of my response (see also Q15 of my RfA). Sdrqaz (talk

) 16:53, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

This is still non the clearer. GiantSnowman 16:54, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

@

Oversight policy allows for the suppression of non-public personal information, specifically "IP data of editors who accidentally logged out and thus inadvertently revealed their own IP addresses" (criterion one), and the revision deletion policy allows for the revision deletion of such edits beforehand, I redacted the IP address (129667821) and the user's edit summary (129667825), then the revision's contents (129667910). Sdrqaz (talk

) 17:27, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you - it wasn't clear to me that the IP and named editor were one and the same. GiantSnowman 18:43, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

stop disruption through discussion

Thank you for quality articles such as Shadow docket, The Man Who Died Twice (novel) and 2020 Yonex Thailand Open, for "it would be best to stop disruption through discussion", for offering admin help and "a healthy dollop of introspection", - user liking elephants, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no.

Thank you, Gerda! I'm honoured to join that long list. I wasn't sure at the time if I struck the right balance with that answer at RfA, but I'm glad that you liked it. Sdrqaz (talk) 22:50, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, - I felt understood ;) - it's on my user page where I traditionally picture men and women, at the moment - making an exception - not including myself, but I took that pic which made it to the German Main page but not the English (well, yes, but in 2016, not now) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:57, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Looking at that photo, everything looks so ethereal and so graceful. Maybe it's the combination of white clothes with the background. All the more meaningful in these times. Sdrqaz (talk) 21:09, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Sdrqaz,

Just a piece of advice, when I delete pages I use Twinkle to do so. One reason is that, after a page has been deleted, Twinkle has an "unlink" feature that, if you select it, will unlink all of the places where the page title has been linked to on the project. It won't remove the mentions (though XFDCloser does) but it will make sure that there aren't any red links leftover from a page deletion. When I saw this particular page was deleted, I also saw that the page creator had added the article to other articles on autism so I removed those mentions either by removing the page from the See Also section or by unlinking it in the body of the article. I don't use the unlink option with every deletion, it's unlikely that a category or draft page will be linked anywhere else but it's useful to do when you delete pages in the main space of the project because editors are encouraged to crosslink articles.

When Twinkle unlinks the title, it also lists the pages where the deleted page title appeared so you can take the next step of going to some of those pages and removing the mention completely. For example, let's say that I deleted a page titled "Alison Williams (actress)" and on the unlink list, there is the page "Williams (surname)", then I know that Alison Williams was listed on the page as a famous person with the Williams last name so I can go to that page and remove the mention of her page which is easy to spot now because the mention will not longer be an active link so no brackets surrounding it. I hope this helps! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:31, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply, Liz. Thank you for taking the time to go through all of this with me – I think I disabled the "unlink" feature because I didn't think I'd have much use for it and similarly didn't install Evad37's gadget. This was helpful, thanks ! Sdrqaz (talk) 21:09, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Firstly, congrats on your RfA passing, but I just noticed that you closed an admin help template with the helped parameter instead of the answered parameter. Kind Regards, Zippybonzo | talk 13:57, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Zippybonzo, for pointing it out and fixing it. I was on mobile for that edit, which meant that I couldn't actually see the template except in-source. I was relying on my memory, which evidently in this case failed me. Sorry about that. Sdrqaz (talk) 14:18, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Is allowed, yes, but

reparations of insufficient attribution can be accomplished without deleting the copy and without flouting G12. Among other methods, histmerges can be carried out, as I did. See also my explanation to someone else in January. Sdrqaz (talk

) 17:06, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello! My apologies for cluttering the UAA page; I'll keep all of that in mind if I see new usernames and familiarize myself with everything :) Thank you for your help/guidance! SPF121188 ^{(talk this way) (contribs)} 19:43, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, Spf121188; UAA gets backlogged very easily. I noticed that you had began reporting there yesterday and it took me a while to get used to UAA too: the instructions there aren't as intuitive as I'd like, if I'm honest. Thanks for reaching out – it's better that these things get cleared up earlier on for future reference . Sdrqaz (talk) 21:39, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Note: Message was in response to these declinations at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention.

22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect

A tag has been placed on Template:Royal Belgian Association Football player requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

I'd wished this file were moved with no redirects

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by

Note: See here. A move was carried out in accordance with those wishes, as it had not been specified that a redirect should have been suppressed.

As shown by 2600:10...54:EC01's contributions, apparently blocking from editing Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard does not block them from editing subpages like /Incidents

Just thought I would inform you since they abused that to edit the incidents page. – 2804:F14:C060:8A01:5119:D5BB:8FB0:EE7F (talk) 08:38, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

NRP has since put down a wider block to cover this type of thing. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 08:44, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

I dunno, seems like a bad idea to block individual pages. But do whatever you guys want. Also, I usually find /42s too narrow on Verizon, but feel free to do whatever. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:48, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know and for the quick resolution, everyone. The last three IPs that person had used (C201, 4B01, 2101) gave a /27, which was too wide for me to assess collateral, so I went with the last two IPs they'd used for the /42 in an effort to stop this /64 Whac-A-Mole (C201, 4B01, 2101). With hindsight, I should've gone with a projectspace partial block instead of the AN-and-ACN one I did (I was trying to make it as surgical as possible, given that they'd only touched those two). On the bright side, we now know that the user hasn't hopped ranges yet ... Thanks for the blocks, NinjaRobotPirate and Zzuuzz, and for the advice. Sdrqaz (talk) 15:39, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, sorry to bother you. I was wondering if you could merge the history from

 Done here, SlySabre. A bit of a tricky case that nearly wasn't possible due to some overlapping revisions. Sdrqaz (talk) 02:59, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate it. SlySabre (talk) 12:10, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

If I am wrong then tell me why it took so long for nominating the deletion process of the Article Shubhra Gupta and Collin D'Cunha? Because if the article had violated the guidelines why it should keep in mainspace with wikidata item? I don't think both articles has some unauthentic content and violation edits!!! Please consult and remove the tag of deletion as soon as possible after discussion only otherwise I have to take a deliberate action further!!! Morgankarki (talk) 13:10, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

@

legal threats are not allowed on Wikipedia. Sdrqaz (talk

) 13:46, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Ok I will join there Morgankarki (talk) 14:05, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Note: Conversation was regarding edits here and here at Shubhra Gupta and Collin D'Cunha.

Thanks for performing admin tasks and for giving me a heads up about {{Db-afc-move}}. Of course there would be a template for this. Thanks. Bluerasberry (talk) 20:53, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

My pleasure, Bluerasberry. It's a recent creation from February and just thought it'd be good to let you know since the regular {{db-move}} has "(link to perform this move)", so it's easy for the eyes to skate over the other notes and just perform it. All credit to Primefac. Sdrqaz (talk) 00:07, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Note: Message was regarding this deletion of Cannabis tourism.

I really don't need these articles such as List of district flags of Germany. Sorry to bother you. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 01:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

@

one nomination for multiple pages if you wish. Sdrqaz (talk

) 12:38, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

I still am not aware of what had been done, before my tagging of the page, to arrange for the page to be deleted, even though the author's comments qualified it for G7. Even if something had, behind the scenes, been arranged with an administrator, it hardly caused any harm for me to tag it. Your scolding was unwarranted and, honestly, baffling. Your expectation as to to the lengths editors should go through before posting a warranted deletion tag is unrealistic. Largoplazo (talk) 01:24, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

@

speedy deletion policy: "A page is eligible for speedy deletion only if all of its history is also eligible." Taggers and administrators are also instructed in Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion § Introduction to criteria to "review the page history to make sure that all earlier revisions of the page meet the speedy deletion criterion". When you tagged the page, there were three revisions in the page history. The second one had an edit summary of "Please delete article!" and had written "Please delete, I meant to start this article at Icelandic Wikipedia...", commented out, in the article itself.

You're correct that a tag had not been added to the page to arrange for its deletion, so thank you. However, it would be better for everyone involved if the tag were the most appropriate one and giving the author unnecessary notifications were avoided – it's distressing for some new users to get the orange bar of doom, but luckily in this instance he was highly experienced.

My expectations of others is enshrined in policy. Sdrqaz (talk

) 12:38, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

I can't fault any of your motivations. I'll just note that I understand the part about reviewing a page's history, and ordinarily do so. I'll note only that, as a practical matter, in the case of an A10 situation involving an article not in English that is about the same subject as an existing article, the only way reviewing the history is generally going to alter the outcome is if, at some point, the article was about something else—for example, if this article whose title is Icelandic for "Julia (programming language)" had, in one version, been rewritten to be about a species of lizard that didn't already have its own article. In this particular case, therefore, I missed the existing call by the author for deletion, and I agree that it would have been nicer if I had seen it and quietly posted a G7 at the top of the article without the assistance of Twinkle. (Or, perhaps, even with Twinkle, since I think Twinkle knows not to post an author notice for G7.) Largoplazo (talk) 22:08, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

I understand where you're coming from, Largoplazo, and am happy we could resolve this amicably . Happy editing, Sdrqaz (talk) 15:41, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

@Bearcat: The page you deleted was restored for a non-administrator to view its history, as I tried to make clear in its protection log. A mini-DRV, if you will. Since the comment has since been resolved, thank you for re-deleting. Sdrqaz (talk) 15:41, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

That's not a thing at all. Under exactly no circumstances should a page in mainspace ever not be an article, and under exactly no circumstances should a page in mainspace ever not be categorized. Bearcat (talk) 15:43, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

@Bearcat: Please see Wikipedia:Deletion review § Temporary undeletion and Wikipedia:Protection policy § "History only" review. Sdrqaz (talk) 15:55, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

If anything you do to any page in mainspace ever results in that page showing up on the Untagged Uncategorized Articles list — as the page under discussion here was — then I always have to do whatever is necessary to get it off that list. In principle, in fact, no page should ever be showing up on that list at all, because every page in mainspace always has to be categorized, but if and when a page does show up there I have to get it off there, and there can never be any exceptions where I have to leave a page on it because it's somehow uncategorizable. If that page ever has any entries at all, I have to empty it out. So whatever you want to do to a mainspace page for whatever reason, it is always your responsibility to ensure that you're not leaving the page uncategorized in the process. Bearcat (talk) 16:03, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

I didn't add a category to a temporarily-restored page for a history review. While in this instance the deletion was helpful, your deletion log entry and subsequent messages here seem to show that you did not check that the discussion was resolved before deletion. Taking a page out of a "categories needed" maintenance report can be addressed by adding a category (as you did) instead of blanket deletion. Sdrqaz (talk) 16:48, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Note: Initial message was regarding this reversion at User talk:Comp.arch. See the page logs for Julia (forritunarmál).

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Template editor and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 29#Template editor until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:40, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Note: See the page logs for Template editor.

Dear Sdrqaz

Please can I edit and resubmit the article?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hekstina (talk • contribs) 15:42, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

@

unambiguous promotion. If you resubmit a page that is similar to it, it will be deleted again. If your aim on Wikipedia is to promote this company (or any others), I suggest that you find a different venue because we have a low tolerance for spamming. Sdrqaz (talk

) 15:55, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your continuous guidance. Please the article is for posterity record and not for advert. Thanks once again. Hekstina (talk) 16:00, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Note: See the page logs for User:Hekstina/sandbox; page was subsequently deleted twice.

Hi, you declined my speedy request and I see it was probably not right category. Sorry for that. But this version 2 page and subsequent redirect is nonsense. What approach you suggest here? Laptopinmyhands (talk) 01:42, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

I'd suggest letting it be,

Dhinchak Pooja (version 2) has the page history of several formerly-deleted versions of Dhinchak Pooja, but was restored by an administrator to let others see the page history (see Wikipedia:Requests for history merge/Archive 31 § Rejected requests July 2018, which isn't very clear either). This is one of the things on Wikipedia where the effort needed to delete it isn't worth it.

I also notice that you have been moving articles into draftspace (Deep6, Chingari (app), Sumit Ghosh). There are guidelines here on how it should be done: amongst other things, you should notify the original author on their talk page and should not draftify pages over 90 days old. Sdrqaz (talk

) 03:07, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Yeah yeah, I know, I'll get to it in a few weeks. — Wug·a·po·des​ 00:13, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

That wasn't my intention, but it's nice to see things work out. Happily, Sdrqaz (talk) 00:33, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Note: Message was regarding the thanks of this statement by Wugapodes at Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard. See this February 2022 conversation and this May 2022 conversation, as well as Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Wugapodes.

	The Admin's Barnstar
	This is the second time within two days that I'm positively impressed by your careful application of tools, your careful analysis of the situation and the advice provided beyond default templates. It's good to have you in the team. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:01, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

This means a lot coming from someone I respect, ToBeFree. Thank you for the warm welcome. Sdrqaz (talk) 21:56, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Note: See this conversation at User talk:Theroadislong and this comment at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Increase.

Which page is now the foundation of the Rise of the TMNT Movie page? I’m beginning to think the manner you went about this was wrong--CreecregofLife (talk) 00:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@

needed attribution, so I carried out a history merge. You can think about it as taping together a piece of paper that's been torn in two, or sewing back the arm of a teddy bear. Sdrqaz (talk

) 01:27, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@

Draft:2022 New York's 19th congressional district special election. If we compare the 4 May versions of the two pages, when Amariokart finished their initial bout of editing (article and draft), there are enough differences that makes it seem like they sprang up independently: different citation styles for the New York Times source, as well as other formatting and citation differences elsewhere. As we know, these election articles follow a certain template, so there are bound to be similarities. After that, there have been some efforts to harmonise the two pages, so it may seem more similar now than it was before.

As for the content side of the issue, there has been reporting from that aforementioned New York Times source, POLITICO, and Bloomberg saying that Gov. Hochul has announced that Rep. Delgado will resign this month. I think that many (including myself previously) misinterpret CRYSTAL to mean that we cannot have articles based on speculation on future events. However, "[a]ll articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred. It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about the prospects for success of future proposals and projects or whether some development will occur, if discussion is properly referenced." This seems to be the case here. I would suggest redirecting the draft to the article and merging any extra information over, with an edit summary noting that it came from the draft to retain attribution. Unfortunately, a history merge here would shuffle the two histories together, rendering the merged one unintelligible. Sdrqaz (talk

) 03:44, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

If you don't mind can you please take the appropriate steps. I'm in an exam season and unable to dedicate much time here at the moment. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 13:22, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Just to note that I've since redirected the draft to mainspace as per the suggestion. Thank you very much. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 17:12, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry I didn't get around to dealing with it, CX. Thanks for letting me know. Sdrqaz (talk) 02:16, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Note: Conversation was regarding

I understand the reason you removed the tag, but it there is another draft version of it,

You can redirect the second draft to the original if you wish,

after six months if there aren't any other edits. Sdrqaz (talk

) 02:16, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Note: Message was regarding the A1 CSD nomination of Draft:Seyed Mohsen Rowhani (2).

What do you mean by that phrase? That user did nothing but copy paste from an article many other editors tirelessly worked on for months. This is not an article by any means.--Sakiv (talk) 22:34, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

@Sakiv: It means non-redirect history. It was not a judgement on the page's quality. Generally speaking, pages tagged with {{db-move}} are only deleted if they were only redirects for the entirety of their history (or, at least, that's supposed to be the case). Sdrqaz (talk) 23:56, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Note: Message was regarding

Hi! Thanks for deleting one of my sandboxes after CSD tagging. I noticed that you referenced G2 in the edit summary; per

@

EpicPupper: I am aware, but thank you for reminding me. Looking back at my CSD nomination log and my deletion log, I can't find any other G2s in userspace. When deleting that page, I tried to provide a little more information beyond the boilerplate reasons, but ended up adding a criterion that did not apply onto the one that did apply. Regardless, I've restored and re-deleted the page to correct the log entry. Sdrqaz (talk

) 03:03, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

hello, you messaged Doesnt qualify now anyways, could you specify what the page doesn't qualify for? And what revisions need to be made? if any, thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trystuff345 (talk • contribs) 21:08, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

revisions. As there was some content in the page history before you removed it, the tag was wrong when it was placed. The page had content when I came across it, so I removed the tag. As for what changes need to be made, it is not at risk of being deleted for having no content. Sdrqaz (talk

) 12:22, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Note: Message was regarding the declination of an A3 CSD nomination. See this deleted history.

I want to create a different article on the name of the Chief Minister of East Pakistan. So it is important to remove the redirections.

Arabi Abrar, for the redirect to be deleted, you need to have an article ready for that title. You can create your page in draftspace (like at Draft:Chief Minister of East Pakistan) or if you have already prepared an article off-wiki, you can replace the redirect with text from your article. The first option gives you more time to get it ready before publication. When it is ready, you can add {{db-move|name of your draft}} to the redirect so it can be deleted. Sdrqaz (talk

) 18:56, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Note: Message was regarding

Chief Minister of East Pakistan

.

---

This is an archive of past discussions for the period February to May 2022. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6