Archive 15

←

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

→

Archive 25

Hi Rosguill! Since you were the closer of the sidebar follow-up, I was wondering whether you might be able to offer your perspective on the matter at Template talk:Talk header#Sandbox. To boil it down, it's a continuation of the disagreement over which introduction page is best. As part of a suite of changes, I proposed that we update the template's link from WP:Contributing to Help:Introduction. Moxy objected, raising some of the same arguments they did at the discussion you closed, and no one else took a side. I still felt comfortable including it in the sandboxed mockup which we subsequently implemented, in part because of the precedent from the sidebar discussion and the other discussions where H:I has consistently prevailed. Moxy promptly reverted (edit summary: dont see anyone that agrees to this bad link), effectively demanding we establish a local consensus.

Personally, my view is that we've already held as large a discussion as we're likely to be able to have on the respective merits of the different intro pages, and that because the question doesn't meaningfully change based on the context (whichever page is best is best, whether it's linked from the sidebar or {{Talk header}} or somewhere else) we should go by the best precedent we have rather than rehashing the same dispute at every turn. I also believe that, per WP:CONLEVEL, Moxy should not be able to override with their sole objection the much broader discussions we've had on the intro page. How do you feel? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 05:50, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

For the sake of completeness, I should note that Robert McClenon graciously tried moderating a discussion between Moxy and myself over this (after I sought help at DRN), but it unfortunately didn't really go anywhere. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 05:50, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

My position is simple....a talk about one page does not mean that every other help page should be orphaned and changed at every turn. This one edit of 500 is contested.--Moxy 🍁 05:57, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

User:Sdkb, User:Moxy - I will comment that one reason that my mediation was unsuccessful was that neither of you summarized what the issue was concisely. I still am not sure what it is that the two of you are disagreeing out. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:08, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

We have an editor replacing our main help page with an edit tutorial to the dismay of those that Graphics are aware of how editors navigate and read. We had a few rfc's that has now resulted in the editor orphanage our project designed community edited page that leads to all our different intros for this one intro ( this would be the exact opposite of what the help project intended). Your current revert has removed the status quo with a link to a format that has failed us in the past and is currently deterring 9000 potential new editors a day. One of the worst choices we have seen here in a long time. We have a new page in the works but the WMF is slow....but now I fear that the change over will be a sluggle.--Moxy 🍁 00:53, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Moxy, my understanding is that I reverted to what was established as the weak status quo following an RfC and remains contested by you, but appears to be at least tacitly supported by every other participant at Template_talk:Talk_header#Sandbox. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:07, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Actually everyone else abstained at that page.... perhaps waiting for those with knowledge of how pages. :I will simply have to make a better case when I have time an make a new rfc. It's disheartening to see what is happening with the loss of accessibility the new pages have caused. It's hard to watch the advice of our accessibility and help projects rejected. Years of data and research went down the drain by one good intention new editor. We are talking about a page that was put to the way side years ago because we know the problem with retaining readers with modules. Now that page is over 70 pages long and is not able to retain 10 percent of its readers after the first page that has zero serviceable information on it. This retention result is even worse then our 2 other module experiments from the past "Tab tutorial" and the " Wikipedia adventure" that we learned a great deal from. That said no intent on any deletion as our readers should have a choice in style as different readers have different preferences thus why our main prose help page links to all the different intro, normal help pages and the missing manual etc.... some design by the visual editor team... some by the helproject... some by the educational team and others by individual editors. It's too bad the main community pages is being orphaned and I fear it's only going to get worse now. Perhaps best the Next Generation learns for themselves.--Moxy 🍁 02:53, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

I can see that User:Moxy feels strongly that some approach is wrong. I can also see that there has been a complex RFC that was, unsurprisingly, largely inconclusive. At this point I think that I was right in originally closing the DRN thread, and was probably mistaken in reconsidering and trying to moderate. I still don't understand what the issues are. If there is another RFC, please notify me so that I can participate in it. Otherwise I think that I am accomplishing nothing. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:52, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

RfC are not always the best thing. What we have is editors not familiar with how to be present information making random votes. As seen at both RFC those that work on help pages brought up the many problems but were overwhelmed by those that think the page "looks good"....who dont care about editor retention or have every edited help pages. We are now loosing potential editors on mass. 2 pages linked for our main page both are peaking peoples interest (10,000 hits a day) but once they see the first page with zero info and action buttons they turn away from reading more (not even 1000 move on to a second page). We already knew about this behavior as we have tried it before 2 times...having collected lots of data with the knowledge that people wont read thru multiple pages to find serviceable information especially those on mobile devices and the fact action buttons are a deterrent for older editors (the type we are looking for). I understand the community cant always get it right...but in this case its causing us to loos many potential new editors. As seen above process was more of a concern then content presentation to the dismay of our project.. --Moxy 🍁 13:58, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

not familiar with how to be present information making random votes welcome to democracy. Ultimately, you have to make the convincing argument (to people less familiar) and if it fails to gain traction (regardless of whether you were right or not) there's not much that can be done about it. The rest of us mostly abstained on template talk because I (and I presume others too) have no clue which is actually better than the other, but I find the pageviews an unconvincing argument. Whilst it may be evidence that Help:Introduction has poor clickthrough, it is not evidence that it is worse than its predecessors (which may well also have a low reading rate, or immediate "close tab", but since it's all on one page that can't be measured).

The project has seemingly failed at increasing new editor participation for years now, so what we're doing now isn't quite working it seems. Hence, I think it's better to try something (based on some kind of reasonable logic), than do nothing. Sidenote: I'd like to see data on what proportion of our most active editors in mainspace and projectspace, separately, are older-time editors; e.g. what year they first hit 100 edits / became autoconfirmed. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 09:59, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Stats Wikipedia adventure tried as the main link after its grant in the summer of 2013. Wikipedia tutorial tried in the summer of 2016 after I updated it the summer before (sad outcome for lots of work) and then our new intro implemented during the pandemic when one might think we should have had a surge in new editors because everyone was home...but what we got was close to our worst month every just last month. Not one of these intros has info on registration on its first page. You are correct that we have no clue if people read info when all on one page but at least we know the info is on that page they are looking at...no point in many pages if noone is even loading them to view them. --Moxy 🍁 13:26, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	Rosguill, you did a really good job reviewing pages. Thank you. Larryzhao|Talk|Contribs 18:25, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

...is it Rosguill or the conflation Rosguil since they can't tell themselves apart? Drmies (talk) 18:30, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Drmies, it's the latter, I don't remember why I ended up adding the extra L. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:33, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Haha--how appropriate. What's the first thing you remember? Drmies (talk) 18:34, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Drmies, I was going to ask "last as in first or last as in last" but now that you changed your question that's even more confusing. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:47, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

[1]! Drmies (talk) 21:25, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Drmies, I suppose it would be a stretch to shout "rhetoric!" and claim the point? _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:37, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		I would like to thank you for patrolling all of my pointless redirects, however, I do not appreciate the unpronounceability of your username. [1] JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 00:27, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

JJPMaster, I tend to think it's pronounced roz-gill but it's hard to tell because no one ever has to say it. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 05:57, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi! So, I had an edit request on {{Country data Azerbaijan}}, as its edit-protected at the moment. Currently, {{Air force|Azerbaijan}} shows the flag of Azerbaijan, rather than the flag of its Air Forces. I believe it is related to the country data template. So, could you help out? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 15:43, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Solavirum, I don't do much template editing and don't really know off hand how to go about fixing this issue, although your proposed change seems correct. As a side note, I don't see any actual edit request from you at the page in question _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:36, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Rosguill, well, is there anyone you know who can fix the issue? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 16:46, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Solavirum, I would ask for help at Wikipedia:WikiProject Flag Template. Looking at the template's code, it looks like no one has set up any special behavior for "Air force", so it makes sense that it's defaulting to the normal flag. As far as the template is concerned, you may as well be typing gibberish. What needs to be done is to add a special case for Air force with the correct thumbnail along the lines of what's been done for the other branches of the military. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:50, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Rosguill, thank you for your time. I'll make a request there. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 17:01, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Please Redirect the page Janick Maceta to Miss Peru or delete Janick Maceta page since it’s non-notable beauty queen page, there is not much reliable references supporting it and lack of notability. Thank You... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.73.199.172 (talk) 05:49, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Please remove the note inserted in the Mioty article here : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIoTy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alkis0 (talk • contribs)

Assuming you want me to remove the {{notability}} template, the additional sources you've provided appear to be either primary sources ([2], [3], [4]), press releases ([5], [6]), or else are published in trade magazines that don't appear to be reliable ([7]). The notability issues have not been adequately addressed. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:41, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

18:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Please accept my warmest congratulations on your reward. Thank you and best regards RAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 01:59, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

RAJIVVASUDEV, I didn't actually win anything this year, although the goodwill is appreciated. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:10, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Still, 63,000 reviews is quite impressive—you nearly beat the bot! {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 02:35, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Rosguill (talk · contribs) - I would love your input/thoughts & such for my draft Draft:Michael Weist -- based on your experience & knowledge. This draft is part of Article Rescue Squadron and has quite a long history, including a creation protection. As such, I've worked to expand, fix, properly format, and cite - but would LOVE your input - Thank you!  :) Viralmemes (talk) 09:16, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Viralmemes, right off the bat, the article comes off as extremely promotional and likely needs a top to bottom rewrite in order to be acceptable. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:44, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Why was the page for Rocket Mortgage deleted? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_Mortgage

Seems like a better case for changing some of the language than outright deleting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2019valley (talk • contribs) 22:13, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

As I wrote in the relevant edit summary, please submit Draft:Rocket Mortgage through AfC rather than copy-pasting it onto the redirect's page. Copying articles in this manner breaks our edit attribution, which can cause copyright issues for Wikipedia. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:16, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Rosguill. After discussions on the Talk-Page of Capital and corporal punishment in Judaism, contributing editors there have decided in favor of changing the title of the article to "Capital Punishment in Judaism." The problem is that there is already a Redirect under that name, which redirects to the very same article, and which prevents us from changing the title. I went to the "Move" section and, when I tried to change the title, received a message that the page's title cannot br changed, since there already exists a title by that name. Can you please help us fix the problem?Davidbena (talk) 18:19, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Davidbena,  Done and implemented as a swap. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:14, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

A thousand thanks!Davidbena (talk) 19:29, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Rosguill, wanted to let you know that you moved the article Typhoon Molave but you forgot to move the talk page (still at Talk:Typhoon Molave (2020)) where the requested move is also still open. BegbertBiggs (talk) 23:43, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

BegbertBiggs, not sure why the talk page got left behind. My failure to close the RM was because I came across the page in the new pages queue as opposed to the RM log. It's all been taken care of now. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:08, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

I looked around a bit and found several international reviews of their recordings. I put one in external links, but am too tired to format it (and others) properly and use. Can you please simply withdraw the deletion proposal. I'll have time next year, - now its Beethoven - Christmas - family. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:32, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, done. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:09, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi this edit just showed up mysteriously in the middle of my talk page. It looks like an editor you blocked two days ago trying to get round their block by dumping sources in the hope that other editors will continue their edit war for them. All the best Mccapra (talk) 06:10, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Mccapra, you're probably right, but this is petty enough that I don't see any reason to take further action. If their behavior turns more persistent or tendentious then broadening their block would be in order. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 06:41, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 January 22#Windows Photo Editor 10.0.10011.16384

I just noticed the results of this RFD. Tavix mentioned Windows Photo Editor not existing, but I think that might just be because it's a technical name for the editing feature of the "Photos" app.
The result also creates a red link on File:Two Gormiti figures.jpg. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 19:18, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Can you provide references for this claim and add it to the article? I think a redlink on that file is correct unless there's specific information about that version we can direct people to. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:22, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

@Tavix: I tried my best, but I guess it isn't meant to be. No sources found. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 18:49, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Darn, well thanks for trying! I think I remember coming up empty when I did a quick check during the RfD. :\ -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:01, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Seeking your opinion for the situation where there is an article under a place name, and you become aware there is another place under the same name, mentioned somewhere on WP (black text only), and you wish to disambiguate. You reason the topic that actually has an article is indeed the primary topic. Is it better to follow WP:PRIMARYRED, creating red links for the secondary topic where appropriate, a two-item dab page at Topic (disambiguation), and add a hatnote to the dab page, or follow WP:ONEOTHER by creating a redirect to where the topic is mentioned and use a hatnote on the primary topic page? The caveat here is, in this case, the topic is a place, and the secondary topic is in Montana, so the red link or redirect would be Place (Montana), and the potential redirect target would only describe roughly where in Montana the place is, so it's unclear if it rises to the level of a redirect. Plus, I don't think a hatnote would be needed or appropriate on the redirect target page, though, as nobody reaching that page would be searching for the primary topic, contrary to the situation described at WP:ONEOTHER, so maybe I just answered my own question with this thought experiment. But, I'm still curious for your take on it (and wonder if maybe some additional explanation at these sections of WP:DAB might help others in similar situations). Thanks, Mdewman6 (talk) 03:59, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Mdewman6, for these questions generally it comes down to the exact extent of coverage and relative prominence of the topics, which can be nigh impossible to guess accurately, but given how you've laid it out here PRIMARYRED seems like the way to go. It's rarely beneficial to direct readers away from the topic with the most coverage. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 05:46, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

I thought that might be the case, since it seemed pretty well-developed, but since I can't see the prior version I threw the CSD tag on it. It's also why I marked it reviewed at the same time, since if an admin looked at, like you did, and saw substantial differences, I felt it passed notability criteria. Although I agree WP:TOOSOON might apply, I wasn't that stuck on it, since it is under construction. If they hadn't started construction yet, I'd agree, although I wouldn't argue with someone else who had that viewpoint, however. Thanks again. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:32, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Onel5969, I'm honestly surprised that the last draft made it to AfD, it was a two-sentence stub. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:34, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Rosguill,

Thanks for reviewing the admin closure request at: Draft talk:Shift4 Payments#Request for Comments re: Draft: Shift4 Payments. I have some questions. First, I don’t understand the “no consensus” closure. Three of three independent editors (not counting me) said it met WP:NCOP. Some did not like the draft because it included analysts reports, so I removed all of these and did a substantial rewrite. I pinged the editor who specified what he didn’t like about the content, and they did not respond. Prior to the RfC, I went to Help for AfC two different times. An editor there said they wanted feedback from multiple editors -- so I started the RfC. After the RfC was complete, I pinged them. And they did not respond. If I need to submit the draft again, I will, but the title Draft:Shift4 Payments is already taken. I can’t resubmit after a rejection. Is there an admin action that will clear this title so it can be submitted? Or do I just need to change the title? I don’t want to seem like I am going around the previous discussions, Thanks Paul.jonah.paul (talk) 19:44, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Paul.jonah.paul, this situation is highly unusual so there isn't really an established procedure. I've gone ahead and readded an AfC submission template to the draft, as well as a comment explaining the situation to any prospective reviewer. You should be able to submit it for review now. As for my closure itself, my thought process there was that editors seemed to approve of it on notability grounds but had some lingering concerns on COI/neutrality grounds. Thus, it's ok to resubmit it, but an AfC reviewer could object to perceived neutrality issues (at which point you could revise and resubmit). _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:01, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Rosguill, not sure what to do about this I was NPP reviewing the above and tagged in for AFD via page curation but the request never went through to current AFD's. I removed the AFD tag so I could re-nominate via Twinkle which I did, but at the same moment another NPP patroller Modussiccandi also tagged AFD resulting in 2 entries now over there. Neither myself or the other reviewer are familiar with using XFD closer to close one or the other, can you assist? Best wishes JW 1961 Talk 23:04, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Never mind, 2nd nomination has been closed, sorry for bothering you. JW 1961 Talk 23:08, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, could you adopt me? You're an admin, and I'm hoping to be an admin, so is it possible you could help me get started on Wikipedia? BlackWidowMovie0 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) 20:21, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

BlackWidowMovie0, I would say that it's far too early to consider becoming an admin. What sort of editing work are you interested in doing? _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:00, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

New page patrolling, counter-vandalism, mostly stuff that doesn't require writing articles. I am terrible at writing, so I stick to the more technical side. I was hoping you'd adopt me. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk · contribs · moves · rights) 21:27, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

BlackWidowMovie0, new page patrolling one of the most complex processes on Wikipedia, so I don't think it would be appropriate for you to jump right into that at this point. I would suggest stopping by WP:TASKS and trying some anti-vandalism, categorization, copy editing or fact-checking work. Work on that for a few weeks and see how it goes. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:32, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

BlackWidowMovie0 I will do that right now. Quick question: Would this be a "yes" to the adoptee request? BlackWidowMovie0 (talk · contribs · moves · rights) 21:36, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

BlackWidowMovie0, I don't think there's any need for formal adopting right now. Get some more experience on your own and come back after a few weeks of work if you think you still need guidance. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:38, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Thank you for reviewing my redirect pages of Toyotas. Please let me know on my talk page if one of the redirects is done incorrectly. DestinationFearFan (talk) 17:22, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

I 100% agree that Luke Hughes (ice hockey) is Wikipedia:Too soon and I think that one of the only reasons his article has been created twice is because of his "famous" family (fame is relative to hockey of course). However, I think he is very close to passing GNG so this may be a useful article to keep an eye on. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 13:41, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

HickoryOughtShirt?4, in that case it may be worth asking the editor who created the most recent version if they'd prefer to see it draftified. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:20, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I see that you have placed a block on Hani Tarik for paid contributions. Hani is participating in WikiGap Pakistan Online Challenge 2020 and all edits were made in respect to this Challenge. You can see her username (#24) on the official List of Participants. Since she is a new user, I would appreciate if you could please overlook it this time and life the block. I will advise her to ensure that in the future it does not happen and if she is ever paid or participates in the next Challenge she put its on her user page. I am overseeing the Gap this year. If you need more information, please leave me a message. Thanks, Regards Khilari&historian (talk) 18:38, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

The Challenge has now closed and any further edits will not be related to this year's WikiGap. Khilari&historian (talk) 18:39, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Khilari&historian, I'm willing to consider an unblock appeal from her, but I'm highly concerned by the nature of many of her edits. The pace of her work is almost inconceivable for a single person working alone, let alone a new editor doing the same, and many of the subjects she was working on (e.g. Draft:Sadaffe Abid, Draft:Seema Aziz) are high-risk for paid editing and have issues with neutrality and the use of non-independent sources. Her editing patterns bear other hallmarks of paid editing as well. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:47, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I understand your concern about her being paid for these articles. I know that she is not a paid editor (at least for these articles) and the motivation is winning the first/second prize (laptop or cell phone). The two articles you mentioned are actually those which have been suggested by the WikiGap team along with almost all of her other articles. Yes she has written a high number of articles but there are others with even more though mostly on the Urdu Wikipedia. Regarding quality, I have chosen to leave it to the larger Wikipedia community to comment on so that the WikiGap Team can claim neutrality in the matter. Tags for neutrality/non independent sources can be placed on them and she is responsible for making sure that the issues are cleared up. I hope this clears any misgivings you have regarding her contributions. I would appreciate if you would unblock her and restore her articles (or I can restore them if you agree). Thanks. Regards Khilari&historian (talk) 19:10, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Khilari&historian, I still have some lingering concerns, and would like to see an unblock request come from Hania Tarik herself, as I think that that could help clear things up. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:44, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Hey Rosguill, I have asked her to make the request as well. Thanks, Regards Khilari&historian (talk) 19:57, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Khilari&historian, I've unblocked Hania Tarik and restored the articles. I do have two suggestions for future WikiGap events that would help avoid this situation. The first is to tell participants to clearly denote their participation on their user page. The second is to not recommend everybodywiki (and similar offbrand wikis) as a resource on the suggested articles page. Pages generally end up on off-brand wikis after being deleted as spam from Wikipedia, so even if the editor importing the content may be working in good faith, they will likely be inadvertently reintroducing promotional content. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:57, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Rosguill. I have noted your suggestions for future events and will forward them to the concerned individuals. Regards Khilari&historian (talk) 18:02, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

The history shows that you moved the draft into article space in response to a G6 request. Was the G6 request made by an AFC reviewer, or by the originator? I don't have any objection to accepting the draft into article space, but I am wondering whether it was reviewed or simply moved, because gaming of AFC is becoming common (both when the use of AFC is expected and when it is optional). Robert McClenon (talk) 05:19, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, the request was from SL93, who is an AfC reviewer. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 06:02, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon I placed a speedy deletion tag so that the draft could replace a redirect. If I did it the improper way, I'm sorry. SL93 (talk) 15:49, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

User:SL93 - That is what G6 is for. Thank you. Could you please look at Free Nationals (album), and see if it also should be accepted? Also, I will mark Free Nationals as a page that went through AFC; that is not important, but that is a nice-to-track thing. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:18, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon I will start reviewing the album now. SL93 (talk) 16:20, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon I took care of it and placed a G6 tag on the redirect. Thanks for letting me know of the album. SL93 (talk) 16:31, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

This year, many people had COVID to fear,
The holidays are getting near,
One thing that will be clear,
We will still have holiday cheer,
Happy holidays and happy new year!!
From Interstellarity (talk) 14:08, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello Rosguill, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021. Happy editing, Trailblazer101 (talk) 17:27, 23 December 2020 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

I wish you Happy Holidays! Trailblazer101 (talk) 17:27, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello Rosguill, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021. Happy editing, Starzoner (talk) 17:55, 23 December 2020 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

I wish you a Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays! Starzoner (talk) 17:55, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

— 16:00, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas dear senior colleague and wishing you a happy new year ahead. I never got the chance to thank you properly for taking a chance on me. Thanks for that my friend. Once again, merry Christmas !!!! Celestina007 (talk) 20:05, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

	Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!
	Hello Rosguill, Wishing you a joyous holiday season and a happy and peaceful New Year. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia(talk) 23:59, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Rosguill for reviewing my Article titled 'NSTEP'. Will try to make it as a normal Article by introducing Notability. It seems to be a Manual. I will change it to the standards of WiKipedia Article. I may need your help, if necessary. !!!. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A.R.V. Ravi (talk • contribs) 02:24, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello Rosguill, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021. Happy editing, RAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 03:28, 25 December 2020 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

May this Christmas fill your life with new hope, positivity, joy and bliss. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you and your dear ones! RAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 03:28, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Iman Qureshi, which you proposed for deletion. This tennis player in fact does pass WP:NTENNIS as she played for Pakistan in the Fed Cup [8]. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Iffy★Chat -- 15:29, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Rosguill! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:54, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}

Did you delete this article? Why is there no record of it being deleted? Ghostofnemo (talk) 08:21, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Ghostofnemo, converting articles for shows/albums/etc. that fall far short of notability guidelines into redirects to the program list articles for channels that list the shows is a standard practice WP:BOLD edit that is part of new page reviewing. You are of course perfectly within your rights to revert it, and it appears that the next reviewer to come along thought your additional citation was sufficient to leave the article standing for now. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:41, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Rosguill. Merry Christmas and thanks for all the continued hard work at NPP. Kind regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 20:52, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, per this, despite his claim of me having no evidence of him engaging in UPE, I actually have off wiki evidence which I mailed to paid-en-wp @wikipedia.org & would be willing to share it with you if you don’t mind. Celestina007 (talk) 21:12, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Celestina007, please do, much appreciated. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:18, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

I just mailed you, check your inbox. I probably should have Cc’ed you in the very first e-mail I sent regarding the editor. Celestina007 (talk) 21:32, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, there's a problem which I've come across while patrolling new pages and I thought you might be able to help. A user (Shkupi Kumanova 1234) created an extensive, completely unsourced BLP (Adem Kastrati) which I tagged for CSD G11. The editor removed the tag, I restored but then someone else came along and moved it to draft. Now, the editor has immediately copy-pasted the article from the draft space back to the mainspace. I was about to draftify the article (again) but it's probable the editor will simply follow up by re-creating again. Is there anything that can be done to stop them from endlessly re-creating the article. Thanks and best, Modussiccandi (talk) 21:26, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Modussiccandi, move warring is a bad idea even when you are 100% right about the underlying content. At this point, since they're clearly not planning on cooperating with AfC, tagging with BLPPROD seems to be the most appropriate course of action now that (insufficient) sources have been provided, I'm going to try talking to them. If they continue to be disruptive, a partial-block may be necessary. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:31, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your help and the advice! Modussiccandi (talk) 21:44, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Mr. Rosguill, forgive me very much for the insult I did to you, I sincerely apologize. Please do not block me. And if you know, can you create a site called Adem Kastrati? I wish you a Merry Christmas— Preceding unsigned comment added by Shkupi Kumanova 1234 (talk • contribs)

Shkupi Kumanova 1234, as I already told you a few times, you need to add more inline citations to reliable sources for claims in the article. While it's not always necessary to cite every single piece of information, you should not have entire paragraphs without citations. Additionally, you need to make the article more neutral. Finally, you are not allowed to copy text from copyrighted sources. Once you've done those things, resubmit the draft using the template at the top of the article. For more information, please read through WP:YFA. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:03, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Rosguill! Thank you for all your help on Wikipedia ! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Be safe Doratig (talk) 01:01, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Have you actually had a good look at the result of your closure at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 16#Grand Mufti of Pakistanand what looks like a WP:UNDUE effect of the section at Grand Mufti#Grand Mufti of Pakistan? I've other things to be looking at but the result looks not good, uncontained, undue and disruptional on a reasonably contentious article. There's been no notification of this upcoming contentious merge at the Grand Mufti article or it's talk page but the RfD trumps it. Not clever. Rethink. If I revert it I go against the RfD. Mess. Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:09, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Djm-leighpark, I'm not sure I see what the issue is at the target, although it seems like the section would fit in better as a sub-section header alongside the other countries. Would that address the issue? _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:11, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

The fact that wasn't attempted was a concern and looks very undue and disruptional on a controversial article to me. I'd back out the whole merge as not notified to target article. Probably has to discuss whether Pakistan has a "Grand Mufti" at all. Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:57, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Djm-leighpark I would suggest that you raise this with the other editors involved in that discussion and try to find a resolution with them regarding the content at Grand Mufti. Regardless of what conclusion that discussion comes to, the solution for the redirect should be clear from there. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:00, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

@Rosguill - I've reverted it. I recovering from Covid19 and I have less energy and patience at times and have limited truck with that disruption to an IPA article.Djm-leighpark (talk) 04:32, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Hey, I saw this comment of yours. What do you mean by "third party is needed to keep the discussion from spiraling in circles"? At this point a third party mediator (preferably an admin) would be very much appreciated. Once upon a time wikipedia used to have mediation. Is that what you meant?VR _talk 04:19, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Vice regent, it wasn't clear at a glance whether or not the discussion was going anywhere, but it was evident that it's still going at a decent pace. Given that the closing request was posted prematurely to begin with (per you, IIRC) there wasn't a clear indication that cutting the discussion short now was appropriate. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 05:37, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello sir, I also included some reliable sources in the draft on the Adem Kastrati page, you will surely like it, if there is any mistake you can search on Google by adding even more information — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shkupi Kumanova 1234 (talk • contribs) 11:36, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Rosguill,

I am contacting you after you put and AFD tag on the article I created Raybak Abdesselem I have closely checked https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(sports)#Gymnastics notability and then I started creating the page. If you look closely the administrator was also working on this page, if the page was not notable he would have AFD himself. I asked 5 people before creating the page and they told me this.

• Junior Gymnastics athletes are deemed notable if they have won a medal, single or more Artistic gymnasts are presumed notable if they meet any of the criteria below

Competed at the Summer Olympics or World Championships (Raybak has competed in 3 world championships from 2018 to 2020 Won a senior individual medal at an elite international competition (Raybak has won two silver medals and one bronze in U21 and European Junior Karate Championship)

So my understanding is he is passing the notability, if you are saying he is a junior then he is already deemed notable.

--CGOV (talk) 08:30, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

CGOV, feel free to make that argument at the AfD, but karate ≠ gymnastics as far as I'm aware. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:51, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Ok :Rosguill but i am talking about athletes anyways. This time I made a new article via draft function can you see if that article is passing the notability so it won't be deleted in future. Draft:Rinki_Sethi

Thanks and happy holidays --CGOV (talk) 18:57, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

When you get a moment would you mind taking a look at these two articles? As they also underwent a WP:CUTPASTE instead of proper move, similar to the Canadian Division issue that you helped resolve yesterday. Deadman137 (talk) 20:38, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Deadman137, I think I was able to solve it. It was a bit trickier because there was a third page involved, so you should double check my work. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:42, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

From what I can see it looks like it went well, there was an intermediate edit on the talk page (from before the action) that needed to be fixed but it's resolved. Thanks. Deadman137 (talk) 20:50, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for bothering you on Boxing Day but they are at it again & this is becoming very disruptive. Celestina007 (talk) 12:27, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Celestina007, looks like the diff you're trying to show me got deleted (interestingly, the link doesn't work for me even with admin privileges). I'm assuming this was related to the Adem Kastrati issue? In which case it looks like someone else took care of it. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:53, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Yup!!!! Celestina007 (talk) 21:37, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

I have just seen today a notice when logging in, that the page about Peter Fenton (guitarist) has been reviewed. Where on which page and when? I haven't even had a note on my talk page inviting me to join for a discussion.

And now when checking I see that this article has just been deleted whereas it was based on reliable sources. Can you provide a link for the previous discussion -- who took the decision to close that article, how many people, were they people who edit on music articles. Was it a collegial decision, wikipedia is a collaborative site or was it a unilateral decision taken by one person.

On wikipedia, there is an article about Pete Best - Beatles' first drummer - who didn't compose anything with the Beatles, whereas Peter Fenton composed three famous songs in the Siouxsie and the Banshees' repertoire. Carliertwo (talk) 01:04, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Carliertwo, the article has been converted to a redirect, which can be revered if you go to Peter Fenton (guitarist). That having been said, the relevant guideline is WP:MUSICBIO, which establishes that musicians should not get standalone articles if they are notable only in the context of a single band. From reading Pete Best, it seems like he received a fair amount of coverage for his post-Beatles work (and I don't think a member of The Beatles, arguably the most storied band in rock history, is a good point of comparison for the relative notability of band members). Unless Fenton has received extensive coverage for work outside Siouxsie and the Banshees, there isn't really a basis for creating a separate article. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:32, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

You haven't replied to any of my questions. Where is the discussion leading to the deletion of the article: how many people took that decision, is it just you. At least, I would like to read a clear reply instead of getting some convolutions. Carliertwo (talk) 01:41, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Carliertwo, it was a bold edit, no discussion necessary. If you disagree, you can revert. If I want to contest the point further, we'd have a discussion. This is how new page reviewing works. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:38, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

The relevant guideline is WP:COMPOSER. It is said that a songwriter is notable if 1 has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition. This is the case for Peter Fenton, two of his most famous songs / compositions were included on the Siouxsie and the Banshees' debut album and on their first compilation album. So yes I want to revert the edit. Carliertwo (talk) 14:37, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Carliertwo, you can go ahead and revert and I won't touch the article again, but I'm rather confident that the next new page reviewer to come by is going to make the same call that I did. The relevant text at WP:NMUSIC is Note that members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability for activity independent of the band, such as solo releases.. The composer guideline is more for people who are known as composers and songwriters (e.g. Irving Berlin), not for musicians who also have songwriting credits. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:37, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, our exchange at National Low Income Housing Coalition made me curious about how WP:NORG is applied. Took a random selection of articles from [organizations based in Washington, D.C.]. Don't all of these ACDI/VOCA, Development Gateway, Center for a Just Society miss by quite a bit? I would tag but I think tags are rarely constructive. Bangabandhu (talk) 06:25, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Bangabandhu, I agree that those seem to miss the mark. It looks like those articles were all created before new pages patrol was established. Development Gateway in particular smells of paid editing to me. I agree that tagging at this point is unlikely to do much (my philosophy with notability tags is that they're useful for alerting editors of recently created articles to issues, and stymieing paid editing, but their utility on articles where the initial editor is no longer watching is limited). It may be worth doing a proper WP:BEFORE and considering an AfD nomination. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, that sounds like a reasonable approach to me. I'm often surprised at what is normative on Wikipedia just because it has gone unchallenged, and how much would change if guidelines were consistently applied. Bangabandhu (talk) 23:07, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Rosguill Sir, I have recently edited the subject. Kindly have a look. Regards RV (talk) 07:45, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

RAJIVVASUDEV, I'm not really sure what you're asking me to look for. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:35, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

I was expecting a review since it is revised. Thanks and regards RV (talk) 02:22, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

RAJIVVASUDEV, There's no standardized reviews for expanded articles unless you're planning on submitting them to DYK or GA. You can also ask for WP:Peer review, which seems to be what you're looking for. My cursory assessment is that it could use more inline references. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 04:21, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Well noted. Thanks RV (talk) 04:41, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Sahaib3005 (talk) 08:31, 28 December 2020 (UTC)