User talk:JC7V7DC5768/Archive 1

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

Sorry what? Where? I'm confused. Why an only warning? unsigned comment by AmberPétursson 14 July 2018

Hi, I am sorry you are currently blocked. I saw your first edit on your user talk which was offensive ,then I saw you make a big change to an important article but you didn't cite it, I saw some other edits which 5 albert square cited in your unblock request. Together I thought you weren't there but I had doubts so I let other editors/admins deal with it. Thank you for your commentsJC7V7DC5768 (talk) 20:57, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Eric Foster White, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SweetCanadianMullet (talk) 13:56, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! I noticed you removed the notability tag on the article Eric Foster White. I disagree that enough improvements have been made to justify the removal of the tag. Instead of re-adding it, and causing an edit war, I wanted to check with you to get a better idea of how this person satisfies WP:NMUSIC. Thanks! Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk 16:30, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Susan Mikula. Thanks! Strikerforce^Talk 14:16, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Strikerforce was:

Personal life section needs references. I'm also still not entirely confident that the subject meets notability guidelines for anything other than being the partner of someone else.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Susan Mikula and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Susan Mikula, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Strikerforce^Talk 16:55, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello, JC7V7DC5768! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! StrikerforceTalk 16:55, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Chrissymad was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Forced Alliance and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Forced Alliance, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 17:13, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Susan Mikula. Thanks! CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 17:39, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bob Glauber, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bill Walsh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

My edit was not a test. 2604:6000:CC80:EB00:79E5:3AD7:BDA6:F78 (talk) 18:42, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Explain to me why they are not constructive edits. I am trying to include a reference to the importance of Seth to the religious tradition of Mandaeanism which only has one other mention elsewhere. How is it not constructive? 2604:6000:CC80:EB00:79E5:3AD7:BDA6:F78 (talk) 18:48, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Exact edits you made today were reverted by an administrator just a few days ago (another ip made the same edits). So obviously if he thinks they are unconstructive they are. If you want to make the edits, phrase it better and get a good source. JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 18:51, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

This makes sense, though with my edits I asked for a grace period for sources and left an email. I'm guessing that it's a totalitarian policy concerning sources? Different guy from the Seth guy above, wasn't certain of how to leave a main message so I piggybacked this one.

Hi, my correction on the location of Coquille River Falls was not a mistake. Coquille River Falls is at the confluence of Drowned Out Creek and Sru Creek. Squaw Creek was renamed to Sru Creek (meaning grandmother in Oregon Dene), presumably because "Squaw" is a racist epitaph.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sru+Creek,+Oregon/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x54c4e1d2daf3a351:0x5b01fb8573dd6e40?sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjP9_jM9azcAhWkOH0KHazkBxEQ8gEIdzAK

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1C0:CB00:5580:F842:9867:9D28:C0B1 (talk) 05:19, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Well you didn't provide a source ,Wikipedia requires sources. Find a source for the info and add it. thank you JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 05:22, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in Conflict of interest matters. However, your two recent posts at the noticeboard are not very helpful for a couple of reasons.

1. You have not included links to the articles you are talking about, making it more difficult for other editors to find them, nor have you linked the relevant editors, as instructed when you click the "Create Discussion" button at the top of the page
2. At the top of the noticeboard, it is made clear that this noticeboard should be used after other avenues of discussion have been attempted, which you have not done. It is far better to leave a note on the user's talk page or on the article talk page to raise your concern and engage them in discussion before reporting them. You can use the Template:Uw-coi on an editor's talk page as a simple way to start
3. It is also made clear on the noticeboard, in red no less, that you are required to notify any editor who is the subject of a discussion.

Please take some time to understand how the noticeboard works before adding to it. Thank you, Melcous (talk) 05:35, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I will reread the guidelines for the noticeboard and follow the advice above. Thank you. JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 05:37, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on OSKAR ( 2018 ) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Cleans up a double redirect

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by 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. Strikerforce^Talk 17:09, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Bluebonnet Ordnance Plant at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 05:18, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

I changed your speedy to db-promo. I was informed that db-g1 was for essentially keyboard mashing. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 06:46, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Regarding your deletion nomination. Are you aware of the non-free content guidelines? Because your nomination makes no sense. --Whpq (talk) 10:45, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

replied on your talk page JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 16:40, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Rita Catolino, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It appears to be a clear copyright infringement of http://ritacatolino.com/. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

  If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. However, even if you use one of these processes to release copyrighted material to Wikipedia, it still needs to comply with the other policies and guidelines to be eligible for inclusion. If you would like any assistance with this, you can ask a question at the help desk.

• It is a draft which has not been edited in over six months. (See section G13 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)
• It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:31, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Rita Catolino, a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:51, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

OK, so your article got tagged for deletion. Lots of them do. No reason to panic. You removed the speedy deletion tag, which you're not allowed to do (read the rules at WP:CSD). Only another editor (not you the author) can remove the speedy tag, so I restored it. However, now looking at the tag and the article, I see that none of the criteria apply, and I've removed it again.

So, now that you have an article without a speedy deletion tag, let's talk about the AFD nomination. That's a very odd route to take: authors do not generally nominate their own articles for deletion. Personally, I don't think Catolino rates an article, and I'm inclined to vote delete at the AFD, but that's just me. Others might well disagree (I've lost more than one argument at AFD), so now that you've started the process, why not let it run its course. Anyway, once the page is nominated, you're not supposed to blank it during the course of the discussion. You can, if you really feel that you just don't want the article up anymore, vote to delete the article at the AFD. You don't get the final word there; it's still a question of whether Catolino merits inclusion, not a question of whether you want your article to exist anymore. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:08, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

replied on your talk page. I was WP:Bold as I was removing the tag to change the CSD to a AFD. I won't cut so close next time. JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 06:50, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

	نشان اصلی
	To improve the article by Ilia Hashemi استاد پاییز (talk) 00:28, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

	The Technical Barnstar
	Good job man keep it up Jezzy-lam (talk) 04:34, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the award. I will keep it upJC7V7DC5768 (talk) 04:35, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Dear Sir,

How exactly am I to make it clear to you that it is impossible for me to have a COI (as you call it) with a page, John Hemingway, that speaks of my work and my life. I am, indeed, the author John Hemingway. And yet I cannot upload a photo of myself, taken by myself, to the author info section.

Excuse me I may be new to this but from what I have seen wikipedia's policies are rather bizarre.

Sincerely, John Hemingway John Patrick Hemingway (talk) 17:47, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Check with the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk for consensus before adding the pic. Thank you.JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 17:50, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Aloha. We must keep Wikipedia a neutral platform and unless you want to re-add 'controversy' sections to the other HI01 candidates, it's best if this one is kept out of the Ing page and apply the same standard to the others. Are you monitoring Kaniela Ing wiki? Then let's re-add 'controversy' to Kim, Case, Fukomoto and Chin as well and monitor those too. This is going to be a lot of monitoring. Do you see what I mean? They all have 'controversy'

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Criticism#%22Controversy%22_section

"Criticism" section A section dedicated to negative material is sometimes appropriate, if the sources treat the negative material as an organic whole, and if readers would be better served by seeing all the negative material in one location. However, sections dedicated to negative material may violate the NPOV policy and may be a troll magnet, which can be harmful if it leads to users with strong opinions dominating the article but may simplify maintenance of the article if unhelpful edits are limited to a single section. In 2006, User:Jimbo Wales weighed in on the question: "In many cases they [criticism sections] are necessary, and in many cases they are not necessary. And I agree with the view expressed by others that often, they are a symptom of bad writing. That is, it isn't that we should not include the criticisms, but that the information should be properly incorporated throughout the article rather than having a troll magnet section of random criticisms."[1]

Many criticism sections found in articles are present because editors collected negative material, but have not had the time to properly integrate the negative material into the other sections of the article. Such negative sections should be tagged with a

The neutrality of this section is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

or

This article's "criticism" or "controversy" section may compromise the article's neutrality. Please help rewrite or integrate negative information to other sections through discussion on the talk page.

to notify other editors that more work is needed to integrate the material.

Sometimes a section is created to describe a significant criticism made by a notable critic. In these situations, the section title should be something like "View of Maria Smith" or "Reaction of the NY Times", and should avoid the word "criticism" in the section title.

thanks for the reply. I made a judgement call, as seen above, it's not easy to see the that thin line in regards to controversy sections. Some editors on this site would want that section kept and some won't. I won't fight the removal of it. JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 21:03, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

At a page titled Manjari Fadnis , while referencing this movie in filmography and career section as I accidentally encountered it , A redirect to Hollywood film journey 2 emerged , so I separately created this page for the Telugu film journey 2 , as suggested to me to stop redirect , but now neither I see redirects , nor it directs to freshly created page , so if this page wasn't required to stop mess , then you can nominate it for immediate deletion , as I have got no special initiative to create this ! Crispgatoglitz (talk) 23:51, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

to know that Government Polytechnic, Adityapur is a living person:) Best,∯WBG^converse 10:31, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

I was here to explain the same. BLP stands for biography of luving person. More info: WP:BLP. —usernamekiran(talk) 10:58, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

@Usernamekiran:-Do you mean biography of loving person ? ∯WBG^converse 11:07, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

lolol. —usernamekiran(talk) 17:09, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing to light my goof up (JC7's folly). I do believe more customized or more tag options would be better. Cheers JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 15:42, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

There is the {{unreferenced}} tag, or {{refimprove}}. Neither is specific to biographies. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:06, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, there are so many tags. I made the tagging in good faith. Thank you for showing me that tagging. Wikidan61 would love to hear about your mistagging adventures. Thanks for pointing those 2 tags out to me. JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 16:09, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

JC7V7DC5768, its okay to goof up once in a while. Most of us do it, even admins. Dont you use twinkle? You should, and try everything in sandbox. —usernamekiran(talk) 17:09, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2607:FCC8:BDD0:8E00:2C93:B595:2B27:294D

He is going around editing out valid manufacturer names choosing to add the parent company instead to as many nameplates as he can. I'm going to go in tonite and try to revert all of them. I'm not the most polished around wiki, are you able to report him or block him in any way, or know how he can be blocked? His edits are not welcome and invalid. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by RTShadow (talk • contribs) 02:29, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 03:03, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, upon review of some of his stuff, it's good, but he's going overboard now.RTShadow (talk) 04:33, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ciara Bravo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page To the Bone (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Connor has 71k subscribers on youtube, that's pretty notable right? That's about 11 times more people than my town has and it has a wikiapedia page. Aviqboyant (talk) 00:20, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. JC7V-constructive zone 03:23, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

This was a perfectly legitimate choice of action to take. —SerialNumber54129 ^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 09:46, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
39		Newton Falls, Ohio (talk)	Add sources
52		Politics of Ohio (talk)	Add sources
108		Capital punishment in Sri Lanka (talk)	Add sources
31		Girard, Ohio (talk)	Add sources
6		Arsho (talk)	Add sources
9		Canton–Massillon, Ohio, metropolitan area (talk)	Add sources
17		Life imprisonment in Sweden (talk)	Cleanup
396		Middletown, Ohio (talk)	Cleanup
26		Resorts International Holdings (talk)	Cleanup
12		Index of Ohio-related articles (talk)	Expand
61		Knox County, Ohio (talk)	Expand
2,070		Yo Yo Honey Singh (talk)	Expand
593		Price discrimination (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
594		Auction (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
1,650		Procurement (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
142		Brazilian Americans (talk)	Merge
25		Uruguayan Americans (talk)	Merge
1,212		Dipak Misra (talk)	Merge
29		Diljott (talk)	Wikify
133		Gilbertese language (talk)	Wikify
5		RauteMusik.FM (talk)	Wikify
3		Frans Otto Eriksson (talk)	Orphan
4		Simranjit Singh Hundal (talk)	Orphan
5		Pearl Going (talk)	Orphan
3		Pricetown, Trumbull County, Ohio (talk)	Stub
3		McKinley Heights, Ohio (talk)	Stub
3		West Mecca, Ohio (talk)	Stub
71		Goreyan Nu Daffa Karo (talk)	Stub
12		47 to 84 (talk)	Stub
2		Morgandale, Ohio (talk)	Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 17:15, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Carrie Goldberg at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:15, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dan arndt was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Fails WP:NSONG - lacks significant coverage in multiple independent reliable secondary sources. Mentions in passing establish that Freddie Hubbard wrote "Up Jumped Spring" but not much else. Noting that one of the more detailed sources is actually a personal website and lacks independent editorial oversight (and as such is not a reliable source).

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Up Jumped Spring and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Up Jumped Spring, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dan arndt (talk) 06:18, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Someone sabotages! Please remove the removal request from the Ilia Hashmi pageMrloopitus (talk) 11:35, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

His acting is dirty and is past is fishy too checking articles.Thanks for Help, but i'm not too god.)He must be spied. Maxim3377 (talk) 18:36, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

If you could add my National Sawdust article to drafts, that’d be great! I ran out of time to work on it and needed to leave my desk. Thanks so much!

Drew // Asdielman (talk) 04:01, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi I will do so. JC7V-constructive zone 04:07, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! Do you know how to navigate the article being listed under Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Crime_and_Criminal_Biography#Murder_of_Nia_Wilson? Let me know if you can think of a way to make sure it gets approved? I am honestly confused why it is there because of how many sources are covering the topic. cbratbyrudd (talk) 04:01, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. JC7V-constructive zone 06:58, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Labdoor, Inc. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message from a bot about this edit, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:01, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

I know I'm talking to a bot, but after tagging it for AFD, I decided to delete the AFD and do ATD instead. I added some sources so I know longer want to tag it with AFD. JC7V-constructive zone 21:04, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for your comment earlier— will the other person be notified as well? What is the procedure for another person continually erasing the changes on my article?

Cbratbyrudd

Cbratbyrudd (talk) 22:49, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your input at Sarah Jeong (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). In this comment at the recent AfD though, it looks like you meant to say "book", not "hook". Thought you should know to avoid any resulting confusion. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 23:02, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

I am posting this on your talkpage out of an abundance of caution solely because you recently edited Talk:Sarah Jeong and, as the message says, not suggesting any policy violation by you. Abecedare (talk) 01:43, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. 96.127.244.201 (talk) 05:45, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

If you are new here, as is clear, it's smart not to be so aggressive with other editors. You clearly do not understand all of the many complicated policies yet. Lay back and don't do say things like the comment on my talk page about "I am right but you do not like it" and then removing three sources that I have just worked to add. Relax, learn. If you continue the aggressive editing and interfering with work people have done, you will just end up going down a bad road. Issuing warnings is not the work of the encyclopedia. Adding sources and text is.96.127.244.201 (talk) 06:02, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Avedis Zildjian Company shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:19, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

On 6 August 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Carrie Goldberg, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Carrie Goldberg, who is representing two women accusing Harvey Weinstein of sexual abuse, once served as a case manager for Holocaust victims? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Carrie Goldberg. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Carrie Goldberg), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

I'm glad you self-reverted. Consensus is not about what you want, after all. There was no consensus one way or the other, hence a "no consensus"-result was inevitable. Kleuske (talk) 20:42, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

I did self revert. I don't know how to protest AFD closes that don't seem correct. But i let it go since the closer appeared to slightly make the right decision. JC7V-constructive zone 22:00, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

What I want if for the article to be a Keep so my AFD stats are 94 percent instead of 89 percent .I am neutral on Sarah's tweets. She clearly meets WP:GNG.JC7V-constructive zone 20:44, 6 August 2018 (UTC) was joking but apparently people have no sense of humor, are rigid and are the civility police

I could care less if an article is kept. But I feel there was somewhat more consensus to keep it than there was expressing speedy no consensus. Since Drmies weasel worded the phrase 'while it could be keep' i decided to give him/her the benefit of the doubt. The AFD should not have been refiled. The article if anything was expanded since the original AFD close. But after a quick review i decided it was barely a no consensus. But damn it was close. I guess I will never close AFDs. JC7V-constructive zone 22:47, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

No consensus when the closer says 'no chance it will be deleted'. This effects my AFD stats. 89 percent sucksJC7V-constructive zone 20:45, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a contest. Your "AFD Stats" are meaningless. If you !vote at AFD in order to maintain a consistent set of "right choices" then don't bother engaging at all. AFD is supposed to be a discussion of the merits of an article relative to the Wikipedia guidelines for inclusion. If your contributions to AFD are not intended to help that process along, then you're just hindering the process. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:30, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

I was joking with the AFD stat things. I guess humor can't get conveyed over the internet. This site really bites newbies hard. Not everyone can be TheSandDoctor. Sorry that I can't convey jokes over the internet. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. JC7V-constructive zone 21:50, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

When i see someone who clearly passes GNG like Sarah even consider getting deleted it makes me quesiton if Newslinger or Neegal even know what they are doing. JC7V-constructive zone 21:52, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

No contenst my behind. I see many users showing off their AFD stats on their user pages (Donner60), with all their achievements and the like. Give me a break JC7V-constructive zone 22:00, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

I am a great communicator in real life, but I can't convey my actions or thoughts with a keyboard. I am internet illiterate . JC7V-constructive zone 22:03, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Dear JC

This is the only Pub in Horncliffe, which is the most Northerly village in England. What do you need? A grid reference and a photo?

William90.253.59.29 (talk) 08:32, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

You can put it back in the article now that you explained yourself to me. If someone else reverts you, then provide a source. JC7V-constructive zone 16:25, 7 August 2018 (UTC)