Jump to content

User talk:Onel5969

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is a WikiGnome.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Edit Count

[edit]
[edit]

Hi! You might find these handy:

Cheers! — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 22:35, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]
[edit]

If you're leaving a question regarding an article you're attempting to get onto Wikipedia, here are some links you might find helpful:

[edit]

Hey Onel, it looks like while running AWB on Shen Baoxu you added a link to the short description [1] – it said "fl.", which was changed to "[[floruit|fl.]]". Links don't display properly in shortdescs, since the reader can't click on them. Would it be possible to alter your AWB settings so that it doesn't add links in short descriptions? Toadspike [Talk] 11:08, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check. Regardless, I didn't know that, so if it doesn't I'll be on the lookout for those types in the future and skip over them. Thanks for pointing it out. Onel5969 TT me 11:09, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Declined speedy deletion: Saint Joseph Academy of San Jose Batangas, Inc.

[edit]

Hi there, and thank you so much for all your help making Wikipedia better! I wanted to let you know that I have declined your G12 speedy deletion nomination of Saint Joseph Academy of San Jose Batangas, Inc. because the page has been revised to address the copyright issues and not all historical versions of the article contain copyright violations. As such, I have completed a cv-rev-del on the appropriate revisions. If you have any follow-up questions, let me know. Take care, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 19:48, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And thank you for all your work as well. That's cool, thanks for the revdel, saves me from having to ask for one. Onel5969 TT me 22:08, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2020 USPS Crisis edit request

[edit]

Hello User:Onel5969, I hope you're doing well. I'm posting here to see if you'd be able to review an edit request I've made on the 2020 United States Postal Service crisis Talk page to update the Legal issues section. Although it's been a while, you are one of the most recent editors of the article which is why I'm contacting you. The new edit request can be found here: Talk:2020_United_States_Postal_Service_crisis#Legal_issues.

If you're able to provide feedback, that would be appreciated since the article has not received much attention in the last couple of years. Thank you very much for your time. Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 16:03, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NPP feedback

[edit]

Hey Onel, I hope you've been well. I know you're not interested in doing NPP work any more, but I wanted to make you aware of a couple of ongoing discussions which I think would benefit from your experience on the matter. No pressure, but I know you have a great amount of knowledge and experience, and if you're up for it, we could use any insight or suggestions that you may have. The discussions at at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers#Investigating the cause(s) of backlogs and Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Coordination#More frequent backlog drives. They basically boil down to a question of what is the role of NPP, what are the expectations of NPP, and how can we improve things in a way that helps with the backlog? Entirely understand if you don't want to chime in, or don't get the time, but I'd remiss if I didn't at least mention it to you on the off chance you'd be willing to contribute to the discussions. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:51, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reaching out. I looked at those over the past couple of days and did intend to add my .02, fwiw. Just trying to formulate my thoughts into a concise, coherent format. Onel5969 TT me 22:46, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate that! I hope you know I respect and appreciate you a great deal, and I felt a little bad actually asking, but there's no one I think that knows more about the plight of NPPers. You're missed, and I'm grateful for how you've shifted your focus instead of leaving Wikipedia :) your efforts, wherever focused, are a huge improvement to Wikipedia. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:51, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert to .adult

[edit]

Hi, I get the point of your argument. However the redirect you've reverted to does not appear to be related either.

What do you think about redirecting .adult to List_of_Internet_top-level_domains#A instead of .xxx? I think redirecting to the xxx article doesn't provide any value. It doesn't even mention the .adult TLD. And even if it did, it would still be irrelevant to the .xxx TLD (as simply put its a different TLD).

We also don't redirect .com to .de just because .de exists. Agowa (talk) 11:48, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just now changed the redirect as I suggested above. Agowa (talk) 23:33, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I didn't respond earlier... your correction is fine. Onel5969 TT me 02:05, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Timeline of Microsoft Windows" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect Timeline of Microsoft Windows has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 18 § Timeline of Microsoft Windows until a consensus is reached. Thryduulf (talk) 23:11, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad

[edit]

The original proposal was to merge the article with Mirza Ghulam Ahmad but you have only redirected it and no text has been merged.Owais Khursheed (Talk to me) 00:05, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you are incorrect. If you bothered to read the target, you would see that all relavent information had been merged, but was subsequently deleted by Pepperbeast.Onel5969 TT me 02:31, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Cook ministry (Western Australia) (disambiguation)

[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Cook ministry (Western Australia) (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because

  • it is a disambiguation page which either
  • disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
  • disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
  • it is a redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" whose target is neither a disambiguation page nor page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:41, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Revert to Thane Metro

[edit]

Hey there, I recently saw your revert to Thane Metro. I must ask, what exactly did I do wrong in editing it? I dont want to come off rudely, but I'm asking because I'm new to editing and want to learn it. Now, I have temporarily reverted your edit as there is very little coverage regarding this project on Wikipedia. Sorry for not adding an edit summary, I dont know how to add it in source editing. Please let me know where I should move this information to until there is more coverage regarding this project.

Have a good day. Idkwhattoputherelul (talk) 16:28, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of East Portland (disambiguation)

[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on East Portland (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because

  • it is a disambiguation page which either
  • disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
  • disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
  • it is a redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" whose target is neither a disambiguation page nor page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:10, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Economics of climate change (disambiguation)

[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Economics of climate change (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because

  • it is a disambiguation page which either
  • disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
  • disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
  • it is a redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" whose target is neither a disambiguation page nor page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:13, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Indo-European people" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect Indo-European people has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 23 § Indo-European people until a consensus is reached. Thryduulf (talk) 23:16, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Polizia Locale

[edit]

I live in Italy and there is a gradual reform going on aimed at encompassing all provincial and municipal forces under the umbrella term Polizia Locale; I am curating these pages and moving them all under the article Polizia Locale. Please do not restore the previous version as I have already redirected and merged other pages to make it all more consistent. Itemirus (talk) 10:11, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then do the move properly. I pointed you to the appropriate policy, WP:CUTANDPASTE. Also read WP:MOVE. Cut and pasting articles will automatically be reverted, and continuing to do so might be seen as disruptive editing. Onel5969 TT me 10:14, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bella Brisel article

[edit]

Hello Onel5969! What kind of additional verification is required for this article? It includes references to literature, museums and databases, also linked to the Hebrew article. Thanks, Yuri Git (talk) 12:07, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Every fact in the article should have a reliable source to back up the statement. So, for example, the statement "She died in 1982 and was buried on the Mount of Olives Jewish Cemetery in Jerusalem." needs a source. Anything uncited will be subject to removal from the article. I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 12:20, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for the prompt clarification, it helps indeed. Most of this factual information is compiled in the catalog (#4 in the literature list) published for her recent exhibition. Should I add several references to the book throughout the article? Best, Yuri Git (talk) 12:28, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that would be a help to other editors who might not see that source. Onel5969 TT me 12:32, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect, thanks, will add Yuri Git (talk) 12:56, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
HiOnel5969, done, also added a reference to an article in Catalan. Hope that the tag can be removed now. Thanks, Yuri Git (talk) 09:27, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. The Artistic style section is still undersourced. Other than that, looks good. Once you add those refs, feel free to remove the tag. Nice job. Onel5969 TT me 10:18, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thank you. The Artistic Style section is fully based on the catalogue text, with a clear reference: "Such periodization was suggested by Adi Dahan, the curator of the "Bella Brisel: Waters from Waters" exhibition at the Tel Aviv Museum of Art (March - August 2025), in her preface to the exhibition catalogue." Hope this is enough. Best Yuri Git (talk) 15:01, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aleeza Ben Shalom

[edit]

I just added a bunch of references to improve Aleeza Ben Shalom. I believe you put the notability tag on the article. Either way, is it in a position now for the tag to be removed? Thank you MaskedSinger (talk) 20:31, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, nice job. Onel5969 TT me 10:19, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! :) MaskedSinger (talk) 10:39, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Juniper Heights, Arizona for deletion

[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Juniper Heights, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Juniper Heights, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clear Lake State Park (Iowa)

[edit]

I've added tons of refs and info to enhance its 'notability', but why this park was picked out once some work was finally done on it after sitting around for more than a decade as nothing more than a 'redirect for now' remains a mystery. Only filling in the blanks here, currently repairing Iowa state parks, the vast majority of which are link rotted and have seen no substantive updating in ten to fifteen years. Harold Angel (talk) 04:12, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It was reviewed because it is a new article. Thank you for your work on those articles. It is always appreciated when effort is put forth onto "stale" articles. It's a nice start article now. Would be great if there were some references from non-primary sources, though, such as newspapers, etc. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 08:44, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the encouragement. But, of the seven references, I count only three that are 'primary'. How, for instance, are the Clear Lake Historical Society and the Geological Society of Iowa anything other than 'secondary or tertiary'? Harold Angel (talk) 15:08, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the issue is that the Historical Society is clearly a primary source. Organizations which exist in support of an entity are primary. And the Geological Society reference is not about Clear Lake State Park. It's great as source for Dolliver, but not for Clear Lake. Onel5969 TT me 15:26, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

[edit]

Hello old friend. Just want to say thank you for your recent help at NPP. You showed up in my watchlist today so I checked the log. Your efforts have not gone unnoticed. Thanks so much! –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:15, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Just trying to help out, the backlog was getting a tad long in the tooth. We'll see how long I can last this time. Onel5969 TT me 15:48, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Ratak Cup

[edit]

Hello Onel5969. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Ratak Cup, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Famousfix scrapes Wikipedia wihtout attribution. This is a reverse copyvio. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 14:12, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, wasn't sure. Onel5969 TT me 15:48, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New to the ins & outs of Wikipedia

[edit]

Hey I saw you added a Notability tag to the Santa Barbara Junior High School page that I beefed up from a pre-existing redirect page. That's cool, I'll add more sources proving notability. My question is, how 'dire' is a tag like that? Does somebody need to add sources immediately or risk the page being deleted? Is it just a general notice that can last months/years before becoming a problem? Is the page still on the docket to get 'patrolled' (another thing I just learned about), or does this tag take it out of the running? Apologies if this is not the correct forum to ask these questions. I've also never written on someone's talk page before. I know there are likely deep Wikipedia pages describing this stuff in detail, but it's a bit overwhelming to the noob. Thought it can't hurt to ask. Thanks Sig. Chiocciola (talk) 20:38, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Wouldn't classify anything on WP as "dire". But what the tag means is that an editor took a look at the article, and did not find enough in-depth sourcing to show that the article meets WP WP:SIGCOV. It does not risk being deleted, but if the tags stay on for any length of time, it does run the chance of being taken for a deletion discussion. In my opinion it would not qualify for either WP:PROD or WP:CSD. And no, the tag does not take it out of the queue to being "patrolled", which is another term for "reviewed". I'm part of a small group of editors who spend time reviewing new articles. I usually will revisit an article anywhere from 5-14 days after I tag it to see if any work and/or improvement has been made on the article. And asking a question civilly is never out of line. One thing I will say is that it is customary when you do so, to provide a page link to the page you're talking about. Saves the editor you're contacting time in hopping back to the article to take a look. Two things, first, the article is well-written and structured, so nice job on that. The second is that Junior High Schools rarely meet WP notability criteria. You'll need several articles from independent, reliable sources which go in-depth about the school, and some that are not from local sources. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 20:51, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome, thank you so much for the response. I appreciate the reassurance that, while the article Santa Barbara Junior High School does need stronger sources, it is not immediately on the chopping block for WP:PROD or WP:CSD. I had indeed been momentarily discouraged thinking that it might get a swift axe. This is somewhat relevant because the area's 150-year old newspaper of record, the Santa Barbara News-Press recently went bankrupt taking its entire archives offline, so the sourcing is there, it'll just take a bit more elbow grease.
Is there ever a bit of a chicken-or-egg problem whereby articles such as this (which may need some TLC, but aren't AI slop, self-promo, junk, etc.) have difficulty getting patrolled even though the search engine indexing that results from being patrolled is what allows the internet to collectively find and improve the article more quickly/easily? Thinking out loud.
Thanks again, first time I've ever received a compliment over the internet :)
Sig. Chiocciola (talk) 21:52, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you need time to work on article, ask for it to be draftified, and then you can take your time to work on it. Onel5969 TT me 00:35, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Plutomania Records 2034

[edit]

@Onel5969: Please why did you make a redirect on Plutomania Records. Many other page reviewers did what they did and didn't redirected. Please may I know the reason why you did that... 2RDD (talk) 11:17, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I said in my edit summary, as per the AfD. And it was a recent AfD. While you added sources, none of them would I deem to be in-depth about the label from reliable sources. Most were simply announcements and regurgitated press releases posing as articles. Onel5969 TT me 11:50, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rene Juchli

[edit]

Onel5969, you recently visited my newly created page Rene Juchli and made some edits but did not mark it as reviewed. I have addressed your comments and have done my best to improve the article. Do you see any problems with it? Thanks for your work in Wikipedia. BuffaloBob (talk) 17:06, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When I touched the article, I wasn't reviewing it, merely looking at new articles for typos, and any small issues (like being an orphan). And no, now I've taken a look at it, and looks fine. Nice job. Marked as reviewed. Onel5969 TT me 17:11, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Inch ant

[edit]

Message moved to Talk:Inch ant. Adpete (talk) 03:26, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Dance Dance Revolution Songs

[edit]

If you don't mind me asking, how are the sources added on List of Dance Dance Revolution songs, not accepted? It is a list article, so the sources are going to be connected to data websites. ☼Phrasia☼ (talk) 05:50, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mind you asking at all. It's not that the existing refs are "not accepted", it's that the existing refs come nowhere near providing verification of the information on the page. More sources are needed so as to meet WP:VERIFY. Hope that helps. Onel5969 TT me 09:51, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lewis Alexander

[edit]

Hello. I was just wondering why you think Lewis Alexander isn't notable enough for a Wikipedia article. He appeared in major productions such as James Bond films, Pink Panther films, Doctor Who, etc. Spectritus (talk) 13:09, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging an article for notability does not mean that I do not think the article's subject is not notable. It simply means that there is not enough in-depth coverage of the article's subject to pass WP:SIGCOV, which is necessary to show notability. This actor may or may not be notable, but you should provide several references from independent, reliable sources which go in-depth about them. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 13:44, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey!

[edit]

It's good to see you reviewing articles again. As an AfC reviewer I've appreciated your second eye, especially with borderline drafts I accepted and that you were comfortable moving them back to draft or AfDing them. Not that it happened often but there were a couple or so. S0091 (talk) 21:56, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Right back at you. While I sometimes disagree with AfC reviewers, it is unusual. And having slogged away in the AfC mines a decade ago, I appreciate the difficulties involved, and the effort expended. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 21:59, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New Articles Review Request

[edit]

Hi @Onel5969, I had created new articles on few Indian villages, Some of them got reviewed, However below articles are in Unreviewed state from past 2 months, If possible, Please help to review them.

  1. Lagumenahalli, Bengaluru East
  2. Bendiganahalli, Bengaluru East
  3. Raghuvanahalli, Bengaluru East
  4. Kodigehalli, Bengaluru East


Thanks in advance. Have a great day! --Naveen N Kadalaveni (talk) 10:35, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm slogging through the backlog. Will be awhile before I get to articles this new. Right now, I'm in May 2024. Be patient. Onel5969 TT me 10:38, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

[edit]

Hello. You have redirected a fully sourced and notable article. The God Roog is a supreme creator whilst Koox is the god of the heavens and rain as stated in the article. Can you please undo your redirect? Thanks 2A00:23C7:E563:1700:1179:A2EB:522E:5205 (talk) 11:20, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, consensus is that this is simply an alternate name for the target article's subject. And nothing in the article suggests otherwise. Onel5969 TT me 00:49, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I will re-edit the article myself. There was no consensus, that's the issue. And having read the Roog talkpage where the merger request was brought, it is quite clear that the two editors have a long standing feud, and that merger request was not brought in good faith. However, if yuou would allow me, I would re-edit the article. The deity Koox is not the same as Roog. Indeed, amongst the Saafi and Seex people, it is blasphemous to say that. Koox is the god of the heavens and rain, similar to the Yoruba goddess Ọya for example.2A00:23C7:E563:1700:B006:8129:3ABC:2B6E (talk) 09:26, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brookfield

[edit]

Hello Onel5969,

May I ask, respectfully, that you undo the redirect you made on the page Brookfield Asset Management? The claim that there is "not enough in-depth coverage" is incorrect. Mark Carney, the prime minister of Canada, was the company's chairman until two months ago, and given the Canadian election underway, Brookfield Asset Management is mentioned daily in the news. A quick search in Google news shows there are well over ten stories per day mentioning the company. If necessary, I can add a stub tag to the article. Tsc9i8 (talk) 00:24, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:GNG to understand what notability means on WP. You need in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to show that something is notable. Onel5969 TT me 00:48, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have read that. And this topic has more than enough coverage from reliable sources. Tsc9i8 (talk) 02:30, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand this deletion

[edit]

.. or how the edit summary ("Back to last clean version") explains it. Can you help? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_people_from_Tucson,_Arizona&diff=prev&oldid=1283855543 184.153.21.19 (talk) 04:59, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doctrine (mathematics)

[edit]

I already said at an edit summary but why do you think references are unreliable? For example, William Lawvere is prominent in this particular field. So his reference should be quite reliable. Anyway, I welcome for you to make your case at the talkpage of the article. —- Taku (talk) 12:06, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neither source is reliable. Please read WP:RS, wikis are not reliable sources. Onel5969 TT me 12:08, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sources listed at Further reading are not references. I think you missed the reference section. —- Taku (talk) 12:10, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No. Listing a book, is not a valid reference either. E.g. simply putting "Encyclopedia Brittanica" as a source doesn't qualify. Onel5969 TT me 12:11, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That depends. For example, Lawvere‘s notes has the word “doctrines”. So it’s directly relevant to the article. Of course, we need to have more footnotes that give supports for specific statements, but saying references aren’t reliable is not right. Like I said, the tags you put are not applicable. If you have concerns about the notability, please explain that at the talkpage (as it is not clear why you think that). —- Taku (talk) 12:16, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, there are two sources which are unreliable, so that tag is quite apt. And there are zero in-depth sources listed, so GNG is not proven, making that tag apt as well. And as I said on the talk page, you're in violation of 4RR, so you might want to self-revert. Onel5969 TT me 12:18, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, your judgement on the reliability isn’t standard here in Wikipedia. For example, lecture notes by prominent mathematicians are frequently considered reliable and are used a lot. If you add tags wihout providing valid reasoning, then that is considered a disruptive editing and so such edits will obviously be reverted. —- Taku (talk) 12:24, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it's a pretty clear, see WP:USERG. And still you are in violation of WP:4RR. And this discussion is now over, since you seem to have a reticence to look at WP policy. Onel5969 TT me 12:35, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As I already said, sources listed at the References section (not Further reading) are not wiki. You seem to be confusing sources at References with the sources at Further reading. (So WP:USERG is not applicable.) As for 3RR, I reverted your edit three times so it’s within the rule. It seems it is you who are being confused. —- Taku (talk) 12:40, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, your reverts at 11:37, 12:03, 12:08, and 12:11. For most folks 1+1+1+1=4. And tagging an article for unreliable sources does not mean that all the sources are unreliable, but some are. Which is the case. Onel5969 TT me 12:44, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Teen USA

[edit]

Hi there, I'm (very) out of touch with policies around notability of late but I always thought the rule is whether notability can be established for an event not whether the current references support it? This gets especially tricky with older events with coverage hidden behind subscriptions like Newspapers.com. Why I ask is you redirected Miss Teen USA 1983 literally as I was working on it (although to be fair, you wouldn't have known that) but your contention that there is not enough in-depth coverage to support notability is clearly not born out by my subsequent edits. The same will be true for the others you redirected. The 1986 article was flat out deleted (I missed the PROD at the time) and I'll have to figure out where to go to get that one resurrected too. CJinoz (talk) 12:50, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. With those there were 2 questions, notability being one of them. There other was WP:VERIFY (apologies if I didn't put that in the edit summary). And redirecting as WP:ATD, is a normal way to deal with articles which do not have enough sourcing to show notability. That way, if sourcing is found, it can simply be reverted and the additional sourcing included. VERIFY is different. Any information which is not sourced can be removed at any time, and then WP:BURDEN applies. Hope that helps. Onel5969 TT me 12:53, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Loai Al Fakir, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page GNG.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant biographies between two selected bios?

[edit]

How do we deal with the near-verbatim repeated bios of Al Williamson in these parts?

Which do we keep for public display? Need advice.

Odla101010 (talk) 09:18, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Wow, don't really know. I don't deal with portals all that much. You might ask over at WP:TEAHOUSE, and someone there might be able to help you. Onel5969 TT me 10:09, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

[edit]

I restored the wrong version at Grande Boucle Féminine Internationale - my apologies. Thanks for fixing. Turini2 (talk) 17:12, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Thanks for reaching out. Onel5969 TT me 15:47, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Planet X issue

[edit]

I noticed you requested a deletion of my constructive edits in Planet X due to a supposed copyvio. Actually, the article was a split of Planets beyond Neptune and information of this article is from that article, not from a random Wordpress page. RealStanger43286 (Let's talk!) 15:01, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. That would have been avoided if you had followed the appropriate policy (see WP:COPYWITHIN. Also, you should really start a discussion on the PbN page on whether or not to split. I've restored the long standing redirect until a discussion consensus is reached. Onel5969 TT me 15:47, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmed Bin Abdulrahman Bin Uthman

[edit]

Regarding your recent edit on the page, wouldn't it have been better to maintain the page and change the target page since this page is about the individual and not the clan? Solanif (talk) 19:56, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Since it was copy pasted from the target. Onel5969 TT me 02:01, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spider Prod

[edit]

Hi Onel5969, how are you?

Artist Ben Spider is prod. I have answered you in Talk:Ben_Spider. Thank you. Isolda (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Simply remove the prod template and say "See talk page" in your edit summary. That should suffice. Thanks for reaching out. Onel5969 TT me 19:14, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Undid GNG tag

[edit]

Hello! I recently reverted your edit at Pinkie Pie because I believe this subject meets WP:GNG. I've listed some reliable sources with significant coverage in the talk page Talk:Pinkie Pie. GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 23:33, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but a couple of short blurbs don't do much for notability. The Feminism piece is the only one I would count as showing notability. Thesis papers rarely are used to establish notability. Onel5969 TT me 00:28, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Audio Engineer Nuccio Rinaldis

[edit]

Hi Onel5969, Rinaldis has been for 30 years the trusted Audio engineer of the performer considered number 1 in the Italian music scene: Mina. He has worked alongside her on multiple studio singles and albums Hits, and Live concerts, including the singer's last performance captured in the Album Mina Live '78. I firmly believe that Nuccio Rinaldis' relevance in the music business can be considered unquestionable and that he is among the very few who have reached levels unattainable today. If you have no further objections, I'll remove the tags notice in the next few hours. Cheers, CoolJazz5 (talk) 23:21, 13 April 2025 (UTC) P.S. Rinaldis is in Italian musical history and beyond. The international successes for which he has been a key collaborator speak for themselves.[reply]

That all is well and good. However, that is not what constitutes notability on WP. What you need are several references, from independent, reliable sources, that go into depth about him. Right now you have none. The first is a primary source, and the second is a brief mention of him. Additionally, please read WP:VERIFY. Everything in the article must be accompanied by a reference which supports the information. Neither of the assertions made in your first two sentences are supported by the reference you cite. What you did is called WP:SYNTH, which is not allowed on WP. I hope this helps. This man was very accomplished, but we need in-depth articles about him to show he is notable. Onel5969 TT me 10:11, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Law Review GNG

[edit]

Hi, just saw you wiped Western Journal on the basis of GNG. Not sure if that's proper - it had substantially more cites than even the other mainstream Canadian journals found here. See e.g. Queen's Law Journal McGill Law Journal University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review. I'm actually a bit at a loss because I can't see any of the journals at Category:Canadian law journals surviving under that standard. Ethamn (talk) 04:15, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Thatis not what constitutes notability on WP. What you need are several references, from independent, reliable sources, that go into depth about him. Right now you have one (the Canadian Lawyer piece). One or two more like that from independent, reliable sources should do the trick. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 10:14, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Editor's Barnstar
A huge thank you for your consistent support and enthusiasm for my merge initiatives over the years! gidonb (talk) 03:04, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Meaningless statement

[edit]

I was originally going to support your PROD of this, but because it was undeleted already, PROD is invalid. I "upgraded" it to AFD. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:47, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reaching out. Sorry I missed the undeletion. Onel5969 TT me 15:19, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Owl of Minerva (journal)

[edit]

Hi @Onel5969, you've already tagged the article for notability. It was PRODed before as well. So I took it to AfD to get a clear notability assessment. You can share your vote if you like. Xpander (talk) 09:37, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Currie

[edit]

What copyright violations are you on about? I only added references to reliable sources (four books about Bolan) to the existing text which had been converted to a redirect for lack of sources. Romomusicfan (talk) 19:49, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The text from that Tumblr post was in previous versions of the article before the redirect for lack of sources. Why are not all earlier edits containing this material also being deleted?Romomusicfan (talk) 20:03, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore the copyright date on the Tumblr post dates from 2017. Text broadly similar to both the post and the most recent text appears in this article version from January 2015. Therefore the Tumblr post is a plagiarism of Wikipedia, NOT the other way around.Romomusicfan (talk) 20:11, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In response to your question on Nthep's talkpage: You wait patiently. My priorities are not the same as your priorities. Feel free to restore your edits, but be aware that even with those edits, there is not enough significant coverage from independent sources to show that they meet WP:GNG, so it will most likely end up at AfD. Onel5969 TT me 12:27, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I will refer them back to the person who originally created the redirects last year. They seemed happy with my similar work on Bill Legend and have not reverted or started an AfD on that. Romomusicfan (talk) 17:52, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Saltmarche

[edit]

Dear Editor:

When you have a chance, could you look ar this article? Thank you, Joan Murray Joan arden murray (talk) 20:47, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited FBK (brake manufacturer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page GNG.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:56, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Onel5969&oldid=1286755488"