User talk:GB fan/Archive 10

This is an archive of past discussions with User:GB fan. 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 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

G'day,

The user who placed that CSD template on the article was actually passing his own sockpuppet investigation link around (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shiwam Kumar Sriwastaw). I gather he is still not understanding things and just spamming, but so far 28 of his accounts have been banned and I'd say the same number of articles deleted about himself. If only there was some sort of user that could make something to filter out his edits... Would be incredibly useful to a bunch of editors that are having near daily edit wars to keep CSD tags on his articles. Thanks either way — IVORK _Discuss 16:27, 20 August 2017 (UTC) Else if you could salt the article you just deleted (Shivam Kumar Shriwastava) on the same grounds of Shiwam Kumar Sriwastaw and all the other varients, that's be good too — IVORK _Discuss 16:32, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Editor blocked and content that they created deleted and salted. ~ GB fan 17:06, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi -

I created the meal kit article and just noticed that HelloFresh is now redlinked. The article was just deleted. They are the #2 player in the space, before Amazon and Whole Foods come in and wipe everyone out. Can you put the article into draftspace so I can take a look at it and fix it? Thanks. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:37, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

timtempleton, it is restored and in the Draft space at Draft:HelloFresh. ~ GB fan 16:34, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks - I'll see what I can do. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:08, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

timtempleton, GBFan, the article's been recreated as the stubbiest of stubs in mainspace. I don't want to tread on anybody's toes so I'll settle for bringing it to your attention. Cabayi (talk) 09:30, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I'm pretty swamped with work right now but hopefully will get to look at this by the end of the week. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:10, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I added some of the info back, added a little new info and trimmed categories. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:50, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Please explain to me: how come a "reliable source" can be a news article from some website that refers about subject X, and subject X itself is not? I do not understand how the only way for something to be reliable is for a third party agent in the situation to mention that subject X exists. Especially when I directly post subject X and it is deemed as "not reliable", it makes no sense at all.

If an author publishes a book that says something, their opinion, that very book is not a reliable source? Does it need to be mentioned in NY times or any other big mass media outlet?

Now let's switch the book with a public statement by that person,recorded in digital media (video) and available to the entire world, how come the statement made by the very person is not a reliable source for what that person expresses? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:14C:5F84:154B:B188:3BC4:5659:12D1 (talk) 02:19, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello GB fan, John Patrick Acquaviva's page is nominated to the second time for deletion, you may want to see the current discussion page. Regards! --Jamez42 (talk) 13:38, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for reverting the spam. I wonder if we could restore this as well, which was removed by a Czech-based IP address apparently. However, if the foundation keeps trying to edit the article, perhaps it was recently revived--are you able to find a reliable third-party source for this please?Zigzig20s (talk) 21:25, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

I don't even know how I got this on my watchlist. Not really interested in the subject. If you want to revert something you can do it. ~ GB fan 21:59, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi There are no source that INTM3 exist. So my request is legitim. --Panam2014 (talk) 11:08, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

It takes more than that for it to be a legitimate WP:A11. It takes two pieces to be eligible and has to meet both of them. one there has to be no credible claim to significance, there is one for this TV show. Two we need a plain indication that the subject was made up by the article creator or someone they know. There is no indication that it was made up by the article creator or someone they know. The article fails both portions of the A11 criterion so it is not eligible. ~ GB fan 11:12, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I don't fault your decline, I wasn't sure about the process, so this isn't a complaint. :) But what do you think should be done, if anything? Edgar Maddison Welch, the proper spelling, was created in Dec 2016 as a redirect. Edgar Maddisson Welch, the misspelled one, was created as an article in Jan 2017 by a new user and redirected by another later that day. TheValeyard (talk) 12:54, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

TheValeyard there are a few options that I can think of and any of them are a valid course of action. One do nothing, the redirect is not hurting anything. Two, nominate it for deletion using WP:RFD stating it is an unlikely misspelling. Three, contact the original creator, UshilRasnal (who was editing as of yesterday), and ask if they would like it be deleted as they are the only significant contributor. ~ GB fan 15:57, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. TheValeyard (talk) 00:13, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

for finishing what I should have done myself at Irish hip hop. I just stumbled across it by chance in some deleted contribs and then got distracted and had to run off to catch the bus. SmartSE (talk) 20:21, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi, you missed this revision. Largoplazo (talk) 12:15, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Strange. Now both revisions are struck through. Before, only the latter was, and I could still see the former. But there's still only one log entry. A weird Wikipedia glitch? Largoplazo (talk) 13:32, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

It's been explained to me: DoRD suppressed the two revisions. Mystery solved. Largoplazo (talk) 13:49, 17 September 2017 (UTC) Largoplazo (talk) 13:49, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Good that it is taken care of. I didn't look close enough when I did the first revdel. 15:43, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

How is playing for a national volleyball team such a notability step in? --Osplace 16:49, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion isn't about notability, it is about significance, a lower level. Playing for the national team is a credible claim to significance and enough to survive speedy deletion. WP:AFD is about Notability. ~ GB fan 17:01, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Osplace, I see I am not the only admin that thinks there is a claim to significance on Philippine National Team members you have tagged. ~ GB fan 17:21, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Understood. --Osplace 17:57, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

President Truman famously asked, as a birthday gift, "Give me a one-handed Economist. All my economists say 'on the one hand...', then 'but on the other...'" (The Economist magazine headlined "The one-handed economist" http://www.economist.com/node/2208841).

My edits may be off to a slow start, so perhaps they're Turtle, rather than weasel.

There are three parts to what this article is about:

• FIRST edition,
• SECOND edition,
• a comparison.

SECOND is there (Windows 98#Windows_98_Second_Edition, but the THIRD hand (called a second hand on a clock) is missing.

What retroactively is FIRST edition of Windows 98 was supposed to be a major advance from Windows 95. Months before it even came, CNN

• called it "an evolution... not a revolutionary new product."
• quoted syndicated columnist Larry Magid as saying "not worth the $109 retail price."
  (the price was dropped to $89)
• who also said: "I think it should have been Windows 97 or Windows 95.5."

Would it be surprising that, even before FIRST came out, it was likely that SECOND edition would be called the real Windows 98?

Admin/senior editor PryStar93 said "not vandalism" per https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASemree&type=revision&diff=802197470&oldid=802195506

Cluebot seemed to be acting on my first edit, not my second, which attempted to be more nuanced - "Some say" vs. "It is" (and I didn't bring CNN into the picture until later on).

Perhaps, since the article has other needs, I should work on other parts of it for now, e.g. Bill Gates at Comdex, sales success or lack thereof, etc. Semree (talk) 20:10, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

I am not clear what this has to do with the edit I reverted. I reverted the edit because the sentence was weasel worded, it made a vague statement that some people say certain things, not who said it. Also the sources were not sufficient. The first one was not reliable and the second on didn't support the sentence as far as I could tell. You appear to say that this has been discussed but you have never edited the one page where discussion about the article should take place, the article talk page. PlyrStar93 is not an admin but even if they were, admins have no control over content that is an editor responsibility. ~ GB fan 22:52, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

I sometimes think why bother, when admins keep crap on this project. Ah, well, I'll go and feed the dog. -Roxy the dog. bark 15:49, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

What is the problem with using WP:PROD or WP:AFD and having the article be here 7 more days when it has already been here 4884 days? ~ GB fan 16:01, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

What is the problem with simply deleting them, and save the seven days wait? Is the rationale incorrect? -Roxy the dog. bark 16:24, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

The problem is that CSD is limited to the criterion listed in the policy. The rationale you gave is a valid deletion rationale at WP:PROD or WP:AFD but not WP:CSD. ~ GB fan 16:56, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

• I apologise for my rudeness here, which you do not deserve, I should not have been so outright rude. CLARIFY I should not have been rude. at all Roxy the dog. bark 18:38, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your recent deletion of this redirect!  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  14:59, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

I was interrupted in my editing of the page Cornelius Stanton. The justification for his inclusion was in the part I had drafted, but not yet included. You have now deleted the page within the first hour, before I was able to complete it. In 1858, William Kell, of the Society of Antiquaries of Newcastle upon Tyne, noted that he was the owner of one of the only 4 copies of John Peacock's printed tunebook for the Northumbrian pipes; he left a significant body of manuscript music, including some tune settings which he credibly attributed to Peacock, though they are not in Peacock's book. Some of his manuscripts survive, bound in the Fenwick manuscript, and elsewhere. He was thus a significant figure in the history of the Northumbrian smallpipes. Please restore the page, so that I may complete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Gibbons 3 (talk • contribs) 17:37, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

John Gibbons 3, I have restored the page and moved it to the Draft space so you will have time to work on it. You can now find it at Draft:Cornelius Stanton. ~ GB fan 18:15, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Hey, GB fan. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Lepricavark (talk) 23:43, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

You deleted it as an expired prod...

Talk page too please.

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 22:56, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

All restored. ~ GB fan 23:21, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your excellent and detailed work identifying challenges in the new Jericho trumpet article. Would you consider taking some time and applying the same focus and energy to the source article (at https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jericho-Trompete)? That would keep the two articles closely in synch and encourage improvements in the original article well.

Thanks!

ClanCularius (talk) 21:45, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

I don't have enough knowledge of German to edit there. ~ GB fan 23:30, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello! Draft:Friends of the Texas Historical Commission was written by a username which shows definite conflict of interest. So, does it still not fall under G11? Adityavagarwal (talk) 15:34, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Another admin seems to think so. ~ GB fan 15:36, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Yep, actually the username almost surely is involved in coi. :D Have a wonderful rest of the day! Adityavagarwal (talk) 15:40, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

	Hello GB fan: You are invited to join WikiProject Cleanup, a WikiProject and resource for Wikipedia cleanup listings, information and discussion. To join the project, just add your name to the member list. North America1000 17:21, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi GB fan, I was wondering if you'd consider deleting the previous revision on the article for Emily Carey. (Redacted) I think from a point of protection of privacy of minors, this should not be in WP and indeed get removed from history. This is the diff where the info was added. Many thanks. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 10:59, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Jake Brockman, I have taken care of it. You shouldn't discuss, even in general terms what the problem is on Wikipedia. There were enough clues in what you put on here to figure out the info. I have removed that info also. The preferred method for reporting things like this is to email the oversight team as it says on Wikipedia:Oversight. In the email you can put as much detail as you think is necessary. ~ GB fan 11:11, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

great, thanks. Will keep this in mind for next time! _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 11:31, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you Panam2014 (talk) 14:31, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I am Chris I just want to recreate the page called Mayestron (rapper) which you deleted on the 22 February, 2017. The article was created by Papamayani which is now already banned on Wikipedia. I just contact you because the page told me if I want to recreate it, I need first contact you, that why I contacted you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrislogan (talk • contribs) 09:26, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

What means should one use to get a draft deleted?★Trekker (talk) 18:02, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

*Treker it all depends on the specific draft, but I am assuming you are talking about Draft:Rocket (group). The only speedy deletion criteria that apply in the Draft namespace are the G (general) criteria. Pages in the Draft namespace should only be deleted if there is no way they could be fixed. If you feel it needs to be deleted you can always list it at WP:MFD but normally lack of notability is not a reason to delete a Draft at MFD. ~ GB fan 18:58, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

I tried to have it deleted due to concerns brought up here.★Trekker (talk) 19:15, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Sir,

I created an article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhay_Patil

This does not appear in Google search at all, i mean i dont expect this to be on top after search, but atleast on 3rd or 4th page? it doesnt appear.

Can you please let me know if there is an issue with this article for which it doesnt appear in google search.

Regards, Chaitanya — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.248.88.125 (talk) 04:21, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

We edit-conflicted declining the speedy tag. The article looks like a copyvio of an old version of the corporate website; so I've reduced it to a stub and added a couple of independent sources. I think the article was still at risk of being deleted per WP:G11 otherwise. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:59, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

I was in the process of going back through the history to find where all the text came from and to see if there was less promotional version to revert to when you did it. The text was probably copied from an old version of the company website. My plan was to get the immediate deletion tag taken off and then try to figure out what happened to the article, you just beat me to that part. ~ GB fan 17:07, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

This is the third ice-cream manufacturer article I've had to rewrite to avoid deletion (the others being Nobó and Kelly's of Cornwall). I'm starting to spot a trend. The article was originally created by a now-blocked sock (so possibly a paid editing piece), and before the copy / paste from the corporate website was in an even worse shape than the three-line stub there is now. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:13, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi GB fan, I understand the result of the AFD for this article was merge. However, the admin that closed it specifically stated that there was no consensus on redirect and article could be deleted. Since I think the article title is an unlikely search term (mostly because of its length), I think it would make more sense not to redirect. Please reconsider. Thanks.--Rusf10 (talk) 20:10, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Content has been merged from List of Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania statewide and federal candidates to Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania. To maintain attribution of the content we need to leave the history in place. ~ GB fan 20:16, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, GB fan! I did write the article about Donald D's debut studio album not considering that the artist's BLP page doesn't exist, so, you had to deleted the page on 18 December 2017 at 20:40. However, it was existed and then was deleted on 22 July 2013 at 19:50 by RHaworth due to A7. Actually, I do not know how the article about the artist was written before, but I guess I can write the better article about the artist, the group he represents, and his first studio album, Notorious, respectively. It may take a couple days, but, to be sure that my endeavors will not be a waste of my time, I would like to get my Notorious data back (on my talk page or somehow differently).

• About Donald D
  • Donald D is an American rapper and producer. He was a member of Rhyme Syndicate, a hip hop collective led by Tracy "Ice-T" Marrow, which served as the beginning of a career for such artists as Afrika Islam, Bronx Style Bob, Divine Styler, Everlast, Evil E, Hen Gee, and its other members. He appeared on various Ice-T's albums, DJ Honda's albums, Everlast's debut album, Rhyme $yndicate Records compilations, and etc. The artist's criteria of notability is similar to Sylk-E. Fyne and J. J. Fad, who has a debut album charted on Billboard charts, and a following sophomore album not charted. (And, possibly, has a more significant criterion, compared to artists who have only one studio album, such as Capital Punishment Organization, Yomo & Maulkie, etc.)
• About his albums
  • His debut studio album, Notorious, was released through Rhyme $yndicate Records, Sire Records and CBS. It was peaked at #78 on the Top R&B/Hip-Hop Albums, its lead single, "F.B.I", peaked at #8 on the Hot Rap Songs.
  • His second studio album, Let the Horns Blow, was released through Sire Records and Warner Bros. Records. The song "I'm Gonna Smoke Him" off the album was featured in Trespass (soundtrack).

I believe that this information will for the time being be sufficient to create an article about the artist and his first studio effort. Tom Holmes (talk)Tom HolmesTom Holmes (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:28, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

I have restored and moved both the artist article and the album to your userspace, you can find them at User:Tom Holmes/Notorious (Donald D album) and User:Tom Holmes/Donald D. ~ GB fan 20:35, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

	The Civility Barnstar
	For dealing with requests at the help desk without getting -upset- with unreasonable requestors. Cheers! ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ 16:11, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Are you a human? I ask because of the reference to a deceased person. Susan Collins is very much alive. I tried to add the youtube clip of her pledging to be a two term US Senator but was somehow thwarted. When is common knowledge enough I wonder. Liard — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liard (talk • contribs) 02:37, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Liard, yes I am a human. With your comment about a deceased person, I think you must be talking about the message I left on your talk page. The parenthetical statement, "(or recently deceased)", is there to explain the policy not to imply that Susan Collins is dead. Now, what you are adding needs a very good source, not someone's blog or a youtube video of her saying she would serve only two terms.

You stated that she lied in 1996 when she said that. A lie is when someone deliberately sates something that at the time they know is false and the intent is to deceive. Not following through on a promise does not make the promise a lie unless there was never any intention to follow through on the promise. The only way we can put that she lied in 1996 is for her to make a statement that she never intended to follow through on the promise she made. At this point all we have is that she broke the promise that she made. ~ GB fan 11:34, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Dear GB,

I am new to editing. I am trying to correct my father's page which had incorrect information on it. I put in references to the Times and to the Guardian. Can you explain the copyright infringement? Should I paraphrase and then reference the articles?

Please bare with me - I am new and finding my way - and also am a little upset that wikipedia indicated that my father had been injured in a car crash in the Hyde Park Underpass which indirectly led to his death (reading between the lines).  I also need to bring up to the wikipedia a question about referencing firsthand reports - in this case the children of the deceased.  I understand the issues of corroboration - but how is History put into the record books if it can only appear on the pages of The New York Times etc...?

Yours Pilk64 - also I have no idea how to talk on my own talk page. I couldn't see a place to put in a "talk" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pilk64 (talk • contribs) 21:03, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Not about you, you're only mentioned in the goings on. Kleuske (talk) 14:56, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Rock Profile. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. 62.253.196.108 (talk) 10:53, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

I don't know how a single edit to an article is abuse or malicious/edit warring. ~ GB fan 11:23, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Dear GB,

You recently reverted my edits requesting to delete the DENR redirect page. Your reason was that it is not allowed to delete a redirect page. I am unaware of this rule and feel that I have a very good reason for its deletion. Could you please either provide evidence for this rule or explain why my reason is inadequate.

Thanks, PiWi 02:46, 17 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PortolaWarrior (talk • contribs)

PortolaWarrior, I did not say that redirect can not be deleted. You nominated the redirect DENR for deletion using the Proposed deletion process. I said in my decline, "Decline proposed deletion, it can not be used on redirects. The fifth paragraph of the policy says:

“

PROD is only applicable to mainspace articles, lists, set indices, disambiguation pages, and files not on Commons. Books may also be proposed for deletion, using a similar process. Proposed deletion cannot be used with redirects, user pages (except user books), templates, categories, or pages in any other namespace.

”

The last sentence of that paragraph says that the process can not be used on redirects. If you believe the redirect should be deleted you will need to nominate it for deletion using the Redirects for discussion process. ~ GB fan 03:04, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Dear GB, thank you for the clarification--I will pursue deletion instead by the Redirects for discussion process.

Best, PiWi 09:38, 17 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PortolaWarrior (talk • contribs)

This picture was taken on my phone. I have provided it to my publicist and it has been in used in several press articles. I own it.

Iy was recently brought to my attention that my Wiki page said it was paid for or something to than nature. and that the picture had been removed. While I rarely check this I decided it was time to make sure this page is valid. Other than these two issues it seems to be so.

Thank you for your time and attention. Keep up the great work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rechemendia (talk • contribs) 02:17, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Rechemendia, Thank you for clarifying the picture. Copyright stays with the photographer not the owner of the equipment. So you do not own the the copyright of the picture unless there was some other arrangements made, but we would still need documentation of that from the photographer. As far as the template, I didn't add it to the article, just noticed it being removed without explanation. You should start a discussion on the article talk page and make you explanations there. ~ GB fan 10:19, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on User talk:Global Technical Services requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Theroadislong (talk) 12:48, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Taken care of. Spam was deleted and talk page access revoked. ~ GB fan 12:52, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

My how time certainly has gone by. I can remember our first interactions. I was a new user, and you were a regular, non-admin, giving me advice on how to get myself auto-confirmed. Then you became an admin, and years later I followed. Now you have oversight access, and I'm just a lowly admin. :-)—CYBERPOWER (Around) 02:03, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi, GB Fan, I see that you declined my request for speedy deletion of Deep Sea Pollution citing that nothing was being advertised, however shouldn't the phrase "They have many seizures it great." be considered as an advertisement?
Regards, SshibumXZ (Talk) (Contributions). 23:51, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

WP:G11 only applies to pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to conform with Wikipedia:NOTFORPROMOTION. If the only thing promotional is that sentence then it is simple, remove it. That doesn't take a fundamental rewrite. ~ GB fan 00:39, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Oh, ok. Thanks for the clarification!
Regards, SshibumXZ (Talk) (Contributions). 01:20, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Dear GB fan,

I was wondering if you would be so kind to send me a copy of the text for the deleted article "International Association of Russian Speaking Scientists". The article was nominated for deletion in late March 2017. I would like to send this text to people who expressed their interest in revising the text and potentially submitting it later.

Thank you for your help!

Kochemir — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kochemir (talk • contribs) 14:56, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Kochemir, You can find the article at Draft:International Association of Russian Speaking Scientists. ~ GB fan 18:59, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

अबे चूतिये बाप की नाजायज़ औलाद आपकी फट रही है तो मिलो बताऊँ मैं हिस्ट्री तुझे और कोई बन नही रहा चूतीये अखिल भारतीय क्षत्रिय शोध संस्थान ने हमें रेजिस्टर करके दिया है सूर्यवंशी है हम क्षत्रिय वंसावरण पढ़ ले बकायदे पूरा आर्टिकल छापा है और तुम्हारी माँ का कोठा नही है जो यहाँ घुस रहे हो मिलो रियल में बताता हु । तुझे और कौन है तू ज़रा बताना तो हमारी नाजायज़ औलाद सतनरैनी में तोमर ठाकुरों में रिलेशन हुआ है आओ बताए तुम्हें हम क्या है — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pradeep Suryavanshi (talk • contribs) 03:10, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Pradeep Suryavanshi, I can't read Hindi so I have no idea what you are talking about, google translate didn't help either. If you have a question or a complaint please express it in english so I can address it. ~ GB fan 11:22, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi,

I've recently discovered that two articles I translated from French have been masked without me being informed, or I may not have paid attention. Since I was the only contributor to these pages I wonder what happened. Can you please enlight me on the reason why?

Thanks in advance for your help. LouisAlain (talk) 09:03, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

I now realise the "Prix Valery Larbaud winners" probably was meant to be the "Category:Prix Valery Larbaud winners" that still exists. My bad. As regards Pierre Voisin I still don't understand. LouisAlain (talk) 09:17, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

There was no reason to inform you since you asked for those two articles to be deleted. On Pierre Voisin your last edit added {{db|1=no reference}} to the article. On Prix Valery Larbaud winners you created it, then blanked it and then added page to be delated. If you want Pierre Voisin back let me know and I will restore it. ~ GB fan 11:46, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

I must have been under heavy influence if I asked for the deletion of Pierre Voisin, I haven't the faintest souvenir of that. Please restore this page because I see no reason why I should have asked if to be masked. I'm also surprised that I added {{db|1=no reference}} to the article, I'm totally incapable to use this template. Or maybe I also forgot that part. Thanks LouisAlain (talk) 17:37, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

It is restored. ~ GB fan 17:46, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try to find some refs. LouisAlain (talk) 18:57, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Hope all is now well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.14.140 (talk) 20:56, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi GB Fan,

I was the one who wrote/authored the Wikipedia entry about 'Zippr' which was recently deleted, and I would like to appeal for it to be restored. In the reason for deletion you mentioned the following 'The article does not prove its subject to be notable. It looks like a run-of-the-mill mobile app, like billions of others, that come and go every day. It does not seem to have any [[WP:IMPACT|...)' a statement which we feel to be factually incorrect.

Zippr is not a mobile app, it's an address. And is one of the few fully funded startups in India working towards solving the issue of bad addressing and navigation in India. Close to 4.7 million Zippr's have been created in India by the government and a few million by regular citizens.

Further reading:

http://www.forbesindia.com/article/hidden-gems-2017/zippr-in-the-right-direction/47987/1

https://munchies.vice.com/en_us/article/nz93a8/gps-helps-pizza-deliverymen-navigate-indias-crazy-street-addresses

Let me know what the procedure is for me to be able to get the entry up and running. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brenden.das (talk • contribs) 10:31, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

The article has been restored, ~ GB fan 11:16, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello

I have proceed with a full AFD.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 07:39, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Sir Just I Want To Tell You In Sanskrit The Ark was A Synonym Of Surya Thats why Suryavanshi is mention in this Article . Some names have been changed to the title of the logo and our bar has been changed to you and you have to edit the article and finalize the article, which is to be used only by you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pradeep Suryavanshi (talk • contribs) 03:30, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

I take it that this has something to do with the Hindi section above, but I still have no idea what you are talking about. ~ GB fan 11:06, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello, I've recently added an article about a person who has been online lately and I would love to ask why you removed the page. Also, he was been reviewed by websites multiple times, leading him to the music career. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:483:100:11:34F7:5D0:6DF6:5AA6 (talk) 16:16, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi GB fan, I just noticed the CSD was reverted. My question is, how would an editor even decide their vote at the AfD if the article is blank? Shouldn't it have been reverted to the point where there was some content? Thanks, MT Train^Talk 16:12, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Which I have also done. and left a message to that effect on the AFD. ~ GB fan 16:13, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi ~ GB fan,
What do you desire to have done regarding Talk:Verizon Center? Do you want me to undue of all of my other redirect edits? I'm still of the position that existing links to the Washington Arena should be revised to Capital One Arena or perhaps Verizon Center per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:TITLE but I don't want to piss you off, and, I recognize that I made an error based on our previous discussion with spyder_monkey. Randomeditor1000 (talk) 16:12, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Either fix the ones you changed or fix all the ones for Capital One. I don't really care which. I desire that the links to Verizon center direct the reader to the correct venue. ~ GB fan 18:30, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough. I rolled back my previous changes. I will also update the others. Randomeditor1000 (talk) 19:54, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Bobby Gonzalez (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

You cited opinion pieces rather than an official school statement or press release. Speculating on the reason for someone's termination is not a fact for an article. Seems to be more of a personal grudge perhaps? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Renee Glover (talk • contribs) 20:52, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Renee Glover, I didn't cite anything, I reverted your removal of sourced information. Your edit summary said you updated the article when in fact all you did was remove content. I have no grudge, I don't follow basketball, professional or college. I have no connection at all to Seton Hall. If you had adequately explained why you removed the information I wouldn't have restored it. ~ GB fan 21:26, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Per this RFPP request. I don't have an opinion. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 01:56, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

I fixed the protection, didn't mean to add full protection on editing the article. Only meant to add full protection on moving it. ~ GB fan 02:30, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Xhevë Krasniqi - Lladrovci (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, im writing to you about the page Draft:Xhevë Krasniqi - Lladrovci, someone from our Wikipedians was thinking that she is writing in Albanian Wikipedia sq. and she publish those words i delteted because its not translated and it was written for sq.wikipedia. Thank you Astronomi06 (talk) 17:57, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Astronomi06, if Kiqina wants it deleted, she can log in and add {{db-g7}} to the top of the page and an admin will delete it. ~ GB fan 18:40, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

What have I got to move? I said I got this page to move in to it. Govvy (talk) 15:47, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Finally you linked to something you wanted moved to that title and it was done. It would have been so much easier if you would have linked to it to begin with instead of making admins guess what you want. ~ GB fan 19:29, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

At first I thought this was a new editor, but now I have my doubts. I've CU confirmed another account and the IPs. He's obviously able to rapidly find IP addresses in different ranges. Doug Weller talk 14:22, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi there. The reason for the deletion of the page "Kurt Hill" is untrue. A late decision has was made to join one of Asia's leading formula car racing categories called Asian Formula Renault where Kurt currently sits second in the championship. You can see the driver mentioned on this page (2018_Asian_Formula_Renault_Series) and also in articles https://www.speedcafe.com/news_extra/mrf-challenge-prepares-rising-star-hill-2018-season/ https://www.speedcafe.com/news_extra/rising-star-hill-living-life-fast-lane-asian-formula-renault/.

Please kindly review this deletion. Khracing96 (talk) 08:26, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Restored as a contested PROD. ~ GB fan 09:14, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi.
You recently declined a speedy nomination. I am not objecting your call, I am simply asking in a friendly manner; what do you think should be done now? I always thought ProD is a waste of time. Do you think it should be AfD'ed? —usernamekiran(talk) 19:12, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

If it were me doing this I would add the PROD first and then if it is contested the AFD. ~ GB fan 22:09, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

@GB fan hmm. Another editor has invoked G3. Based on the horny dragon I think it might be true. First I had assumed it was a real, and "ancient" game hence no coverage. But whenever I see horny dragon(s) around, i get very suspicious. Long story. —usernamekiran(talk) 06:30, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Another admin did delete it as a hoax. I don't think it qualifies but I won't object either as it isn't a blatant hoax and that is what is required by G3. ~ GB fan 11:32, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

ERA Diktyo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hi, not wanting to cause any issues over this page. Please see the talk page on that article where I try to explain what I was doing. Oska (talk) 11:24, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Already been there and responded. ~ GB fan 11:37, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Ok, if you think it's fine to remove the speedy delete tag I'm happy with that. Thank you. Oska (talk) 11:42, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Not only do I think it is fine to remove the speedy deletion tag, Diako1971 should never have added it in the first place. Since there was a valid redirect to revert to it was ineligible for speedy deletion as not having content. ~ GB fan 11:45, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

hi,i am zorro.i do have a source.it is"chemistry now,second edition book.by peter.d.riley — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.134.6.86 (talk) 14:44, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Then you need to add it so that others can verify the information. ~ GB fan 14:48, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

http://timepass.com.pk/sana-javed-biography-date-of-birth-age-height-weight-education-affair-scandal-drama-movie/ Plum3600 (talk) 16:33, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

I don't know anything about that website. It would be best to ask at WP:RSN. ~ GB fan 17:30, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Nychology (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

	Outstanding Contributions Recognition
	Your work and contributions are exemplary. With intelligent and most helpful inputs, you truly are an outstanding contributor. I particular recall one lesson on speedy deletion; that was truly memorable. Over time, I've seen you being an exemplar for other editors. In that spirit, GB fan, keep up the great work! :) Lourdes

One week have been passed, when you sent the message to the creator of ERA Diktyo, τhen he did not react, so the article should be deleted.--Digital Greece (talk) 16:12, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

It will when a neutral admin reviews it. I can not delete it myself since I was the editor that tagged it. If you had done it, then I could have deleted it. ~ GB fan 16:20, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi.Why the heck should this silly category be kept? --Århus (talk) 19:55, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

I never said it should be kept. You nominated it for speedy deletion. Speedy deletion has to fit into one of the listed criteria or it can not be deleted. If you feel it should be deleted you will need to nominate it using redirects for discussion. ~ GB fan 19:57, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Could you do this for me? It would take half an evening to read through the page you mentioned. As a practically-non-editor of en:WP this is far too much stuff to read. --Århus (talk) 21:19, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Another admin deleted it. ~ GB fan 23:00, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi GB fan, Greetings. I CSD the page above is because it has no content. I might be missing understanding something here as it looks like it meets the CSD criteria, and kindly advise if I have mistaken so I may learn. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 11:18, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

If an article is nominated for speedy deletion using a criterion and a neutral editor removes it and says the criterion does not apply the criterion should not be used again. In this case Kudpung nominated it and Bbb23 declined it for WP:A3. If you thought it applied you should have gone to Bbb23 and asked the question. I just made it easier for everyone, I added more content. ~ GB fan 11:22, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

GB fan, Thanks for the info. I didnt check on hist when I CSDed the page. I saw you added content and source to make the page meets GNG. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 11:27, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

You should always check the history of a page when CSDing it. Is it vandalism that put it into the state it is? I have seen many articles where the creator in their second edit blanks the article. Then a NPP comes in and reverts their blanking, warns them about vandalism and then nominates it for deletion under some criterion other than WP:G7. If the NPPr had just looked at the history they would have understood what happened. ~ GB fan 11:36, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Agree and a good practice. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk)

Why? (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) Chris Troutman (talk) 22:24, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Chris troutman, I don't know why 81.146.26.142 contested it. I just removed it after XLinkBot restored it. ~ GB fan 22:29, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:31, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Sir, I just wanted to let you know that not only the media and Seahawks themselves say that the Legion of Boom is over, but so does Wikipedia. If you go to the page for it, you can clearly see that it says that it ends on 2017. So please stop saying that I’m using “unreliable sources” when literally everyone is saying it. Thank you. Ray Dragon99 (talk) 23:13, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Ray Dragon99 when you add a reliable source to the article then I will stop saying you are changing info without providing a reliable source. You have not provided any source for the information. ~ GB fan 00:06, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi there. I noticed the deletions of Shane Charles, Kishara George and Alleyne Lett. All three are national record holders and either finalists at the Pan American Games or a medalist at the Central American and Caribbean Championships in Athletics, which explicitly meets WP:NTRACK points 2/3. Can you undelete these and request that the nominator take these to AFD if required? A further two deleted athletes are senior national record holders (Adrian Thomas (athlete) and Geraldine McQueen (athlete)) which I would argue should be another point of notability. It goes without saying that mass article deletions without engaging the affected project doesn't really make for a healthy community! Thanks SFB 01:17, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Sillyfolkboy, I have restored 4 of the 5 you mentioned here as contested PRODs. The last one Adrian Thomas (athlete) was deleted after an AFD that Spartaz closed. ~ GB fan 09:21, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

FYI; I've opened an RFC on a topic you were recently involved with. Talk:Tattoo#Addition_of_"tattooage"_to_article OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:52, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

I made the following corrections to the entry for SQL:

Structured Query Language --> SQL Query Language

Added para:

  According to Jim Melton, the editor of the SQL standard, the proper pronunciation is "ess cue ell," and not "sequel" as is commonly heard. Jim also says that SQL stands for "SQL Query Language" and notes that this is a recursive acronym. In some early prototypes, SQL stood for "Structured Query Language." That is not true for the standard. 

Provided reference:

  Jim Melton; Alan R. Simon (1993). Understanding The New SQL: A Complete Guide. Morgan Kaufmann. pp. 4. ISBN 978-1-55860-245-8.

The primary author of that book is Jim Melton (works for Oracle Corporation), chair of the ANSI SQL Language Committee at the time of SQL-92. He definitely should know.

If you do not have the book, I do. You can find it also on Amazon at https://www.amazon.com/Understanding-New-SQL-Complete-Management/dp/1558602453

Look on page 4. This is well known in the industry, by the way. By retaining the current wording, Wikipedia is perpetuating an old myth that went out of date in the late 90s.

The ANSI Committee decided that "Structured Query Language" was not appropriate because they wanted to deal with matters that are not structured in the traditional senss (e.g., XML, JSON, etc) and this led eventually to the NoSQL (Not Only SQL) movement.

Using the Encylopedia Britannica or Oxford-OED is just not good enough in technical matters. "Facts" do go out of date in technology.

If you do not believe me, then please do some serious research and verify. Or contact Jim Melton. He is on LinkedIn.

Glen

(Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glen Mules (talk • contribs) 17:11, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Glen Mules: Please don't post your contact info on Wikipedia - it was visible to anyone on the Internet. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:19, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

You are changing sourced information and your changes disagree with the sources that are after that information. You should open up a discussion on the article talk page, not here. ~ GB fan 17:24, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Deleted in 2015, is it now notable? See https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-a-koch-backed-veterans-group-gained-influence-in-trumps-washington/2018/04/07/398b67c4-3784-11e8-9c0a-85d477d9a226_story.html Regards, Oathed (talk) 16:26, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Oathed, since Concerned Veterans for America was deleted via WP:PROD if you would like it restored let me know and I will restore it. ~ GB fan 17:04, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Not sure if it's notable, I just saw the WaPo article and googled it, finding the old deletion. I'm guessing others will search for it, too, as apparently the Koch bros. are using the organization and it's allegedly gaining momentum in regards to the VA. I looked at Google Trends at https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&geo=US&q="Concerned%20Veterans%20for%20America" but not sure how to easily see absolute numbers. Your call, imho.Oathed (talk) 17:34, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Oathed, not my call at all. I have not looked at what was in the article in 2015 (since I deleted it) nor at the sources you linked above. If you or anyone else wants the article I deleted restored, all they have to do is ask. If no one asks it stays deleted. ~ GB fan 18:39, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi @GB fan: The Wikipedia page for the Bollywood movie Kashi to Kashmir was deleted by you on 13:49, 27 March 2018.
I first created a userpage for the same and then shifted it to a Draft - User:DiplomatTesterMan/Kashi to Kashmir / Draft:Kashi to Kashmir. I had left a message for you on the talk page of the userpage [[1]] also to inform you of creating a page you had deleted before. Do you think it can go in the mainspace or does it still lack notability and enough credible sources (WP:NFILM)? If you think it should stay deleted then that is alright. - DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 05:44, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

I don't remember seeing your previous note and the page has been moved to the main space. ~ GB fan 09:13, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

That wasn't a U1. Look closely at the user name. Septrillion (talk) 01:35, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

You are right, I missed the missing l. It doesn't make any difference, the user is now blocked also. ~ GB fan 01:48, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Do you review your edits before executing them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rondonia9 (talk • contribs) 23:41, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

My edit summary says it all. I reverted your edit because you did not explain why you removed the comment. ~ GB fan 09:24, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

(erroneous Twinkle msg deleted). That account looks like a User:Styron111 sock, they've posted on my talk again. Regards Widefox; talk 10:54, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

I have indef'd the account and deleted or revdel everything they have done. ~ GB fan 11:23, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, please can you revdel my User:Widefox/CSD_log. Regards Widefox; talk 14:47, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

I have removed some and revdel everything. ~ GB fan 15:03, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for helping on Winter Cherry complex

Trish pt7 (talk) (talk) 15:06, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Why did you decline the speedy, what is the controversy? Can you move the article to main space? Valoem ^{talk contrib} 16:13, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Did you really just ask me what the controversy is? You tagged it for deletion, the tag was reverted, you undid the tag and it was reverted again and then it was tagged again. Speedy deletion is only for those pages where there is no controversy as to its deletion. THis is controversial otherwise it would have stayed the last time it was moved over. At this point you will need to obtain consensus that the draft should be moved to the main space. I would suggest doing a requested move on the Draft's talk page. ~ GB fan 16:36, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

When does one need consensus to create an article? In fact I have consensus in this case 5 editors including myself are in favor of mainspacing the article. One editor is in disagreement. The place for such discussions is AfD. So the proper channel is mainspacing and then if someone has issues AfD. Every episode of Westworld has an article including the episode after. I added sources to the article, reviews and a production section. This article will survive AfD. Regardless mainspacing is the correct procedure. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 16:51, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

When someone tags an article with WP:G6 they are asserting the deletion is non-controversial. Obviously this one is controversial so WP:G6 does not apply. If it is really non-controversial then the requested move should just fly through and it will be in the mainspace soon. ~ GB fan 16:56, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Ok, but if I am correct here, it should be mainspaced if requested. Is their a guideline that says I need consensus to create an article? I understand if the article gets deleted through AfD it does, but there has never been such discussion in this case. This article is completely new. I asking you to mainspace it again for me. The procedure for anyone disagreeing is to AfD as creating new sourced article are not bold actions but proper procedure, am I wrong here? Valoem ^{talk contrib} 17:00, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Again, I am not going to move it to the mainspace, that would require me to delete a page as non-controversial and from my look it is controversial so I will not delete it. ~ GB fan 17:02, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

I am looking for clarfication here, I understand you don't want to mainspace it, fine. But when an editor disagrees with a sourced article written by an experience editor, he or she need to AfD it not draft it. Am I correct here? Valoem ^{talk contrib} 17:05, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

I am not getting into a discussion of the proper way this should have been handled by anyone else. ~ GB fan 17:08, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi GB fan. I think this should be a disambig page instead of a redirect. I would appear to me that, while the two regions are *mostly* conterminous in terms of geography, they are distinguished by... Oh, already done. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 11:02, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

That is a better solution. I just saw the nomination and redirected it to the location specified there. Didn't look to see that you had already deleted it and restored it once. ~ GB fan 11:28, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

GB because you so boldly removed my text if you knew anything you would have known he trademarked hip hop movement, EVERYBOBY knows this SMH. asking you to replace it TONIGHT here is your source you CAN'T GET NO BETTER THEN THE united states patent and trademark office -

http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4806:yoiit4.5.2 http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4806:yoiit4.5.3

NOW YOU CAN ADDED IT BACK TO THE RONALD SAVAGE PAGE, anf you can go to http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=tess&state=4802:8itpa9.1.1 yourself.

http://enspireusall.com/2017/05/17/hip-hop-pioneers-ronald-savage-and-busy-bee-acquire-use-of-the-trademark-for-the-hip-hop-movement/#.Wup4oIgvzmY

http://amsterdamnews.com/news/2017/may/19/fourth-season-ordered-black-ish/

http://www.thehypemagazine.com/2017/09/the-hip-hop-movement-calls-for-the-passage-of-the-dream-acts/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Street sting (talk • contribs) 02:55, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

I will not be adding it back. I removed it only because there was no secodary source for the information. If you have secondary sources then you can add it back with those sources. A uspto source is not enough to show this is a significant fact. ~ GB fan 09:17, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

what world are you living in the only way to own a trademark in the United States is to reg it with the uspto, wi;; you see the Amsterdam News Paper. you see the secondary. i will be reporting you and that"s a significant FACT. Street sting (talk) 09:28, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

I didn't say it wasn't true that he has trademarked it. I just said that a reference to the uspto is not enough to show it is significant. If you feel you have enough secondary sources to add it back then do so. If you feel I have done something wrong, report me. Nothing will come of it because I have done nothing wrong. ~ GB fan 10:07, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

What was your reason for removing Ronald Savage is the owner of Hip Hop Movement. It's stated facts, you choose to remove this over and over and only that, what is your issue. Won't you word it the way you see fit the links refs are there, you have made it personally personal, I believe at this time you must be a Zulu I am elevating this matter because you have baseless facts to the remove this other then YOU personal don't want it there when the refs are right in your face, if you feel it needs more then help with the matter, I'm glad this shows I been more then willing to work with you on this and. You made it personal by keep taking this down. I will add another reference from YouTube with a interview with this guy Ronald Savage and Sway in the morning digging you closer to a hole so I have enough on you to escalate this issue and report you to make sure something can be done about you since we cannot meet on a neutral understanding or agreement which you refuse to do so, therefore making this a bigger matter bigger then it supposed to be and bringing negative attention to Wikipedia because trust me I am not giving up. My next step is taking this straight to the news the worldwide news and Reporting you and making sure you can never do this to anyone else again because you have a personal problem with something that you cannot get over the fact that this man is the owner of the hip hop movement, and I'm glad this website documents everyone statement, my statement to you is I'm going to the news about you. Street sting (talk) 15:00, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

I have explained why I removed it on the article talk page. ~ GB fan 15:49, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Also to address some of your baseless attacks. There is nothing personal about this. I could care less if he has trademarked it. I neither like nor dislike the fact that he has trademarked it. I know nothing about the man or the movement other than what is written in this article. There is only one person here who is making this personal and that is you. ~ GB fan 15:54, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi GB fan - could I please ask you to Rev Del this edit - thanks - Arjayay (talk)

 Done ~ GB fan 17:47, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

What sections do you think I have removed? MissTofATX (talk) 20:09, 9 May 2018 (UTC)MissTofATX

MissTofATX it looks like you figured out what you removed with your edit. You still have stuff to fix that you broke with your edits. I know that Now and Forever, Purple Hearts, Lisa, Unforgettable, Search, Ironside, Police Story, Crossings, Bluegrass, Changes, Kiss and Tell, NCIS, Chuck, and Anger Management all link to the wrong page. There might be others that I did not see right off the bat. Another thing I notice is that when you readded the lead and infobox, you put the lead first then the infobox. The infobox should be at the top of the article edit page followed by the lead. ~ GB fan 22:14, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

GB fan I appreciate your response, I’ll go in now & and check all of the links. Re:Lead/info

box, I guess I may have been confused, because I see it differently on other pages, like Elizabeth Taylor, Clint Eastwood? Are those pages wrong?

MissTofATX

MissTofATX (talk) 00:04, 10 May 2018 (UTC)MissTofATX

MissTofATX I am not sure what you are seeing on those Elizabeth Taylorand Clint Eastwood. When I look at the edit source of them, the infobox source is at the top and Cheryl Ladd has the lead first and the infobox next. Please click the links I have provided to see what I mean. ~ GB fan 00:14, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

GB fan Ok, it must be a visual presenation thing when working via mobile vs a computer. I see what you mean, now, and I will correct the Cheryl Ladd page. thanks

MissTofATX (talk) 00:21, 10 May 2018 (UTC)MissTofATX

GB fan...just confirming all of my good faith completions of the corrections we discussed above. Thanks!

MissTofATX (talk) 18:27, 10 May 2018 (UTC)MissTofATX

MissTofATX, it does look like the ones I identified above have been fixed now. Like I mentioned in my initial message above there may be ones I missed. Doing another quick look I see Poison Ivy points to the plant not to a creative work that she worked i. I don't know if there are any other ones that need to be fixed. ~ GB fan 18:46, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

I reverted your removal of the deletion template Patrick Little (disambiguation), because it "disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic)". Patrick Little is the primary topic. Patrick Little (Senate Candidate) is the sole disambigated title. A hatnote to Patrick Little (Senate Candidate) on the former is sufficient, per WP:ONEOTHER. Cheers, --Animalparty! (talk) 21:43, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Normally when an admin declines a speedy deletion request, you discuss before readding not the other way around. Still don't agree but it isn't worth arguing about. ~ GB fan 22:53, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

@Animalparty:, not sure if you are watching here. ~ GB fan 22:57, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

I gave a second link to the source which IS NOT publisher's web site, but a general source about comic books, so why did you remove it again? And no, republishing of comic book based on popular demand is not a minor thing, it's a big thing, since republishing is happening 25 years after original release, the comics are popular and tied to the movie which is popular too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.39.229.207 (talk) 23:39, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

I didn't remove it after You added a second source. I removed it twice with the only source being the publishers website. I don't log out and edit. ~ GB fan 23:42, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Oh, ok, then I apologize. I assumed it was you. It was somebody else then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.39.229.207 (talk) 23:45, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

I'm listing some of the points why the above redirect should be deleted: 1. Please see the "Individual" section of Shan (disambiguation) page. There are not more than one actor named as Shan, so that is why I wanted to rename "Shan (Tamil actor)" page to "Shan (actor)". But this page already exists as a redirect to Shaan Shahid. 2. This redirect is absolutely wrong, since this muslim actor's name begins with Shaan and not Shan, so the existence of this redirect is hindering my purpose of moving the page "Shan (Tamil actor)" to "Shan (actor)". So, I hope you understand and delete that redirect, thankyou. Harsh Rathod Poke me! 02:50, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi. This vandal has continued his/her activities. Since you last blocked that account, I thought I'd alert you. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 18:11, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello. Miss Grand International has been deleted many times under that name, and also many times under other similar names, the article title is salted and there are no sources confirming notability in the draft. Salting that the people who endlessly promote the pageant here have been circumventing by highjacking existing articles about other subjects, turning them into articles about the pageant, and then moving it to Miss Grand International, overriding the write/creation protection. I.e. pure vandalism. So if it can't be deleted as G4 there has to be some other criteria it can be deleted under, because it should definitely not be here. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 10:55, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

You can nominate the Draft for deletion using WP:MFD if it is so bad it needs to go away. I do not see it as needing to be deleted from Draft space. It isn't being continuously resubmitted for review. There are no major problems with it, just nothing at this point to show it is notable. ~ GB fan 11:13, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

When declining CSD tags (or PRODs for that matter), would you mark the article as unreviewed? Marking a page for deletion with the NPP tool automatically marks it as patrolled, and most new page patrollers don't continue to review an article after tagging it for deletion because it's a waste of time if the article is deleted. Natureium (talk) 23:09, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

I have no idea how to mark an article as unreviewed. ~ GB fan 00:29, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

If the toolbar isn't visible, try the instructions here. Natureium (talk) 01:38, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't want to start warring over this edit but the cat is now empty again. I'm probably more forgiving than most of future-year categories, but these TV ones are probably db-g6-able on WP:CRYSTALLBALL grounds; there's a Category:Upcoming television series hierarchy as a waiting room until the actual debut date is history. Le Deluge (talk) 10:38, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Based on the criterion it gets to sit for another 7 days. I re tagged it as empty. ~ GB fan 10:42, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Can you delete the page that misspelled "Awrards" instead of Awards? [2] 183.171.120.235 (talk) 04:38, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

 Done ~ GB fan 09:22, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

To let you know, this article has now been speedy deleted more than once. It was obvious to me that the user was making tests (Moving from user page, making up content). But anyways :) Polyamorph (talk) 19:05, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Robert Miller Gallery page was deleted under speedy deletion, after links were included in Robert Mapplethorpe's page to link some of his shows to the gallery (already reference in the artist's article). There are a number of references that link the artist to the gallery. Example below:

https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/27/arts/robert-miller-manhattan-art-dealer-dies-at-72.html

Also included in the main gallery owner's page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Miller_(art_dealer)

Please let me know what needs to be adjusted to restore the Robert Miller Gallery page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tns0321 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Tns0321, I have restored it and placed in the draft space. You can find it at Draft:Robert Miller Gallery. ~ GB fan 01:05, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

If you want to leave the page up, that's fine. But I fabricated all of the information on it. It's all fake. I just jimmy-rigged information from numerous sources and made it all up from there. I am surprised you didn't notice that on the talk page. Biogeographist has basically spelled it all out. He's the one who caught me in what I did. Urstadt (talk) 17:48, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't want the article up or deleted, I know nothing about the subject and will not make that decision. I just said that WP:G7 does not apply. ~ GB fan 17:59, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi, you say, "redlinks do not belong on DAB pages", but the Manual of Style leaves this possibility open: "Do not create red links to articles that are unlikely ever to be written, or are likely to be removed as insufficiently notable topics". The topic you removed is discussed on several other Wikipedias in a separate article, as I mentioned, so I think there is a good chance that some-one writing in English would realize that it is strange to have an article on world records and baseball records but not on the general subject of sports records. It would be nice if you would respond to that edit summary instead of repeating the same general remark which is an exaggeration of the guidelines. Bever (talk) 16:04, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Bever, the pertinent section of the Manual of Style concerning DAB pages is at MOS:DABRL. ~ GB fan 16:51, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I cited. Bever (talk) 17:38, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Bever, If you read the section on Individual entries, it says "Include exactly one navigable (blue) link to efficiently guide readers to the most relevant article for that use of the ambiguous term." The entry you were adding had exactly 0 blue links. Every entry must include a blue link. ~ GB fan 17:58, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

After rereading what I wrote, not sure I was clear what I meant. Every entry on a DAB page must have a link to an existing English Wikipedia article that talks about the concept covered by the DAB page. The entry you were adding only had a red link so it does not belong. ~ GB fan 00:58, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi I just draftified the above article as per WP:DRAFTIFY but I should have CSD'ed it as an A11 especially as I saw you already deleted it once. Should I revert to be deleted or just let it rot in draftsapce? Dom from Paris (talk) 13:30, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with it in Draft for now. I don't think it will ever survive as an article. If the editor submits it multiple times it will get sent to MFD and then we are done with it. ~ GB fan 13:41, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

OK thanks for that. cheers Dom from Paris (talk) 14:11, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello GB fan. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Amanda Sullivan Randle Rudd, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 18:40, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Eastmain can you tell me what you see in the article as a credible claim to significance? ~ GB fan 18:42, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

First African American head of an important cultural landmark, the Chicago Public Library. Coverage in national publicatoons such as Jet and Ebony. Those references and some others are now added to the article. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 19:29, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Could you please review and publish Robert_Miller_Gallery Page. The changes with citations have been made accordingly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Robert_Miller_Gallery — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tns0321 (talk • contribs) 21:27, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

You can add {{submit}} to the top of the page and then save it and someone will look at it. ~ GB fan 22:36, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

You declined CSD. Will it not fall under G5? I provided links that I thought proved it worthy of G5. 2Joules (talk) 10:31, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

It does not fall under WP:G5. For G5 to be valid there are two pieces that must be met. First the article has to have been created by a user that is violating a block or a ban. Second, there can't be any significant edits by anyone else. There is a possibility that the creator was violating a blcok when they created, but there is no block or even an open sock puppet investigation concerning the account, so for me it fails the first test. Even if the creator was violating a block or a ban there are significant edits by editors who are not violating blocks or bans. ~ GB fan 10:43, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

You are effectively saying that the arbitrary semantic ordering that results from alphabetical ordering is irrelevant to what WP users are looking for. 3 simple questions: 1) how relevant are silly Hollywood productions that just happen to bear a certain title to the subject matter and 2) how likely is it that people are looking for silly Hollywood production proper names instead of the core lemma (network - the central concept in network science, in this case) plus 3) how likely is it that editors link to network in other articles with a clear intention of referring to silly Hollywood productions? Please tell me that you do not deem this a non-problem. -- Kku (talk) 10:49, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

No I am not saying that. You said it was a little absurd to have the list topped by arts and entertainment. I just said that it isn't absurd to alphabetize the sections on a DAB page. The manual of style for DAB pages even recommends alphabetizing the sections in item #3 of the ordering section of the MOS. If you want to make a logical argument as to a better way to order the sections on the DAB page you can. The place to make your argument is on the DAB's talk page not here. I am going to tell you that I see this as a non-problem but that doesn't mean it can't be changed. ~ GB fan 19:10, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Barryking45 appears to be a new sick of NintendoAU. Cheers Flat Out (talk) 12:21, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Schütz-Werke-Verzeichnis is a valid redirect, with several valid links, Schütz-Werke-Verzeichnisses is German nonsense, with no link. It should not exist. I don't understand your reply per edit summary, sorry. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:56, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, You said as your speedy deletion nomination I don't believe we need a redirect from wrong German. The closest criterion to that is WP:R3, implausible redirects. That does not apply because it only applies to recently created redirects, this redirect was created in 2008, that is not recent. You will need to nominate it for deletion using WP:RFD. ~ GB fan 14:03, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

I have been on Wikipedia for several years but have never nominated anything for deletion, I don't even know how it works. This is such blatant nonsense. It's as if you had Koechel catalogue's for a redirect, instead of Koechel catalogue, serves no purpose. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:11, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, I have done a nomination using your speedy deletion nomination as the rationale. ~ GB fan 14:37, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

The info was taken from 'Universal Product Code', where the additional information can be found that the first scanned item is now at the Smithsonian Museum. Therefore, either the info should be missing from Troy page and from Universal Product Code page or should be in both, I guess. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lancioni (talk • contribs) 17:39, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Lancioni, Just because some information is in an article and it mentions another article doesn't mean it has to be in the other. The information about the first scan of a UPC is appropriate in the History section of Universal Product Code. It is useful information to know where the historical event happened. As far as the history of Troy, it isn't that big a deal. There are lots of articles that mention Troy and talk about events that happened in Troy but the article on Troy makes no mention of them. The article on any specific city has to concentrate on the events and people that are significant to the history of the city and this isn't. ~ GB fan 18:16, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Well, I think that being the place where a worldwide standard was first applied is relevant for such a small town as Troy, where virtually nothing important ever happened. Readers of the article might be interested to know that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lancioni (talk • contribs) 20:24, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Lancioni, You said it best when you added it. It is just trivia. ~ GB fan 22:06, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Also, if you want to continue discussing this please start a discussion on the article talk page, Talk:Troy, Ohio. ~ GB fan 23:38, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Help see [3] - FlightTime (open channel) 17:33, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

And you need to see User talk:Ritchie333#John W. McCormack redirect why I won't delete it. ~ GB fan 17:35, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't understand, the links you pointed out are to John W. McCormack which is the final target page, but I can not move John William McCormack because of the redirect. Won't the links be fixed once the move is completed ? - FlightTime (open channel) 17:45, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

I misunderstood what was happening. I thought a new article was being moved there and everything was going to be broken. ~ GB fan 17:59, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

I fixed it. ~ GB fan 18:00, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I was trying to action this request, could you tell how I went wrong ? - FlightTime (open channel) 18:10, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

The biggest thing was I misunderstood what was happening. I thought John W. McCormack was being moved to John William McCormack so that John W. McCormack could be made into a new article. So I was thinking all those links needed to be fixed before the new article was placed there. When in reality the move was just the opposite of what I thought was happening. ~ GB fan 18:31, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi - I was wondering if you could help me. I put a speedy deletion on Hampshire Premier which was declined. The reason I did this was because I need to redo all the Hampshire pages due to the RFU restructuring the leagues and I can not rename them properly because I moved the Hampshire 1 page into Hampshire Premier by accident. This is what I need to do:

• Hampshire 1 becomes Hampshire Premier
• Hampshire 2 becomes Hampshire 1
• Hampshire 3 becomes Hampshire 2

However when I try and move Hampshire 2 to become Hampshire 1 it will not let me do this as I already moved Hampshire 1 to Hampshire Premier. This is very confusing and I need to rectify it. Hopefully you can help or put me on to someone who knows how to do this. Thanks. Jgjsmith006 (talk) 12:46, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

I think I have it all straightened out, let me know if it is correct. 11:54, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks GB fan - will start updating the pages later today. Jgjsmith006 (talk) 13:00, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

All leagues now updated - thanks once more for your help. Jgjsmith006 (talk) 22:55, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I saw that you declined speedy deletion of Maurice Luiset Seguin, but someone else has just deleted Maurice seguin (not by my request), which was as old as this one. Anyway, both redirects have no links to them and are simply wrong. They were the result of a couple of edits by an IP in the article on Marc Seguin back in 2006. Must they be kept just because of their age? Thanks, —capmo (talk) 14:17, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Capmo, The other one should not have been deleted as an WP:R3, but that is a problem with that admin. The redirect does not have to remain it is just not eligible for speedy deletion under WP:R3, The redirect can still be deleted but it will need to be listed at WP:RFD. ~ GB fan 14:23, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

I see. Will follow that route then. Thank you —capmo (talk) 14:26, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Would you mind blocking 1-800-KRISTOFFER & You drink you drive you spill? Thanks. Sro23 (talk) 00:36, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Both blocked. ~ GB fan 00:49, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Another one: Beer plus gasoline equals death Sro23 (talk) 09:14, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Done, thanks for pointing it out. ~ GB fan 09:16, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Think you could take a look at the history of FJ? Sro23 (talk) 14:55, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

I think I got everything. Just think in a little over 4 days you will be able to do it yourself. ~ GB fan 17:35, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

I was interested in your assertion that A7 does not apply to films. I agree that films are not among the items listed but if I made an amateur movie featuring some friends and wrote an article on it, surely it would be deleted as not being notable? In the article Alpha Class (2016 film), for which you declined my speedy deletion request, everyone and everything mentioned on the page is red-linked and non-notable, it's the most non-notable film ever (exageration). Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:19, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

And by the way, you missed one rev-del for the initial version of the article (847965243). Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:24, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

I got the one I missed. A film can be deleted as not notable either through WP:PROD or WP:AFD but not as an A7 speedy deletion. A7 is limited to the items onthe list. If it isn'ton the list it can not be deleted using that criterion. ~ GB fan 15:47, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

you answered my request to create a redirect. HOwever since the page was protected from creation, IMO now it must be protected from editing. I did some due diligence to possibly recreate it, but there is no sources beyond dicdefs and accasional usage in passing, often as a synonym to misogyny. Therefore I guess a typical wikipedian will not create it. Therefore please protect it from newbies. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:28, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for protecting, but is there any chance of protecting the version that has been there for 10 years, rather than rewarding the group(?) of pro-Jain POV-pushers who have been vandalizing this and many other articles over the last few days? See: [4], [5], [6], (2 more rev-del edits here I can't see, - this one links to other shifting ip accounts - this was the first one - note User:GermanJoe reverting one incarnation with " (Undid revision 848955261 by 182.57.109.176 (talk) block evasion, non-neutral language, no context)", with it being promptly reinstated. This all may be one user, and the use (misuse) of typical WP edit summary terms suggests experience. Thanks, Johnbod (talk) 01:43, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Oh, and there's this one, with an account, who seems about to get blocked. Johnbod (talk) 01:47, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

When it comes to IPs there is only behavioral evidence for such likely connections of course, but Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Atmnn has additional information about the "block evasion" part and the broader case. The PoV-pushing - both with unsuitable images and unsourced content changes - affects several articles where this sock account is active. GermanJoe (talk) 08:37, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Joe. Johnbod (talk) 13:45, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

I am not going to change anything at this point. None of the IPs that have been changing this have ever been blocked or warned. No one has discussed anything on the article talk page about this. In fact no person has edited the talk page since 2016. I see edit warring but no attempt to resolve the dispute. Looking at the history both of you are past WP:3RR. Between 1511 10 Jul and when I protected it both you and the IP had reverted 4 times. On 9 Jul the IP reverted 4 times and you reverted 3 times. When I clicked on the page it was on your edit but by the time I pushed the protect button it had been reverted again, so that is where it sits. If another admin thinks it should be reverted that is their call and I will not object. ~ GB fan 13:06, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Well, all of the ips are shifting ones that only ever make edits for a few hours. Since most of their edits on other articles have been reverted by other editors or myself, and a high proportion were clear vandalism, crude Jain or Indian POV-pushing, he/they certainly would have been warned or blocked if they had a stable ip - as the only one with an account has been warned by other editors, and is just now at ANC (update: now blocked). I hear what you are saying, but the fact is the top image has been stable for over 10 years with, as you say, no one raising the matter on talk. Protecting this version entrenched the POV sockpuppet. Plus the image is poor quality and not historically significant. Thanks for replying. Johnbod (talk) 13:45, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Based on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Atmnn I have reduced the level of protection to Semi and reverted it. ~ GB fan 14:12, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll launch a "confirmation hearing" at article talk on the top image; I'm not wedded to the old one, but didn't think the new one was best. Johnbod (talk) 14:13, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

you can also GOOGLE

hbo special redd foxx

Redd Fox HBO Comedy Special 1978 - Redd Roxx was the master of Comedy and an earlier pioneer. no longer on the earth.. someone has to defend the code

this is the link to the HBO Special... 1978 -) the internet was not around at this time...but the HBO Special is amazing ..the complicated thing is to link it to wikipedia...this is not an article in some newspaper... it is on youtube

anyhow....god bless REDD FOXX

(cur | prev) 16:08, 10 July 2018‎ GB fan (talk | contribs)‎ . . (26,451 bytes) (-38)‎ . . (Reverted 1 edit by 186.69.59.4 (talk): Unsourced. (TW)) (undo) (Tag: Undo) (cur | prev) 16:06, 10 July 2018‎ 186.69.59.4 (talk)‎ . . (26,489 bytes) (+38)‎ . . (→‎Nightclub act: Las Vegas Strip and one of the first HBO specials) (undo) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.69.59.4 (talk)

The sources you are presenting only confirm that it happened not the rest of the information, it was one of the first or that he instantly became a headliner or that he broke new ground. All of that needs a secondary reliable source to be included. ~ GB fan 16:04, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

u delete after two minutes...some people do not like redd foxx

and after the 2nd delete..this fast

i got to work kid

. (Reverted 3 edits by 186.69.59.4: You need to provide a reliable source that actually verifies this information. What you linked to only verifies that it happened none of the other information in the edit

think about material in 1978

Foxx broke new ground for minorities performed in Las Vegas, where he instantly became a headliner and broke new ground in television with the 1978 HBO Special — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.69.59.4 (talk) 17:27, 12 July 2018‎ (UTC)

I believe what you are adding is true. What you believe or what I believe though means absolutely nothing. If reliable sources do not discuss it then it does not belong in the article. ~ GB fan 18:34, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I was really confused but hadn't thought to check the logs. Guess I'll be taking it to AFD now. ...   CJ [a Kiwi] in  Oz  12:12, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi, no problem here. I just realize there is no CHC article yet, i suppose i have to create it first now that i got corrected. I also think i got to read some guidelines first actually, my apologies. My question is : is there any guide for Wikipedia, like the most common mistakes editing getting started guide or something ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lakhovsky (talk • contribs) 03:16, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Before adding an entry to a DAB page a article must discuss the concept. An article is best but it can be a mention in another article. I haven't seen any common mistakes but you might want to take a look at Help:Getting started. ~ GB fan 11:25, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello, a few years ago you helped me to delete User:Titodutta/Tasks under CSD:U1. For a few months on another project I have a list like d:User:Titodutta/Tasks. On En WP I do not have a focused task page (it is here and there). I feel the same approach might be useful for me for the upcoming months, and perhaps I can use the same page. Is it ok, if the page is restored? Thanks in advance. --Titodutta (talk) 12:10, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Titodutta, If you want to recreate the page you can do that without permission. If you want deleted content of the page restored I can do that. I am not sure which one you want to do. ~ GB fan 12:14, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Whilst there's an aspect of shared usage, that needs to be addressed, I'm inclined to think that it's typical promo-speak from these quarters. (A we for the entire PR team......).On a side-note, it's probably best to delete the user-page for now, whilst mentioning the ticket number in the t/p thread.Best,∯WBG^converse 11:13, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Wingify (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hi there, Hope you are doing well. I wanted to know you deleted Wingify's page for the reason: Advertising of a company. Non-notable startup. What credible proof do you need for reverting the change? I can cite a lot of sources (unpaid).

Disclosure: I work for Wingify. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anubhav2205 (talk • contribs) 08:49, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Anubhav2205, the deletion I did was via the PROD process. All that needs to happen to have an article deleted via PROD restored is for someone to ask for it to be restored. Since you work for the company please read WP:COI and pay particular attention to WP:PAID. ~ GB fan 10:12, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. How do I ask and Where do I ask? I have already disclosed that I work for the company, is there proof required? There is no false data being represented. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anubhav2205 (talk • contribs) 06:12, 8 August 2018 (UTC) (Copy-pasted Anubhav2205's post from Talk:Wingify (permalink) prior to G8 tagging, Sam Sailor 06:58, 8 August 2018 (UTC))

I have restored the article. ~ GB fan 10:33, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Elite Wealth Advisors Ltd. (talk · contribs)

This user is continuing promotional edits on their talkpage while blocked. Can you revoke their talkpage access? Thanks. 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:4DEE:54C9:1726:A980 (talk) 04:11, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

One misuse of the talk page is not enough to remove access. I have warned them about the proper use of the talk page. ~ GB fan 10:41, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Amani.jarrar (talk · contribs)

This page should not be speedily deleted because... all the information written here is my original work and the information has been referenced to original work in the reference list. you can have a look at all my social media profile to make sure all the information given here is correct and don't have any copyrights violation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Amani.jarrar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amani.jarrar (talk • contribs) 09:26, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

I didn't nominate your userpage for deletion or actually delete it. All I did was decline your request to delete your talk page. Just because something is correct and doesn't have any copyrighted content does not mean it belongs on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not the place to publish your work there are plenty of free webhosts where you can publish your work. ~ GB fan 10:16, 16 August 2018 (UTC)