Archives

Archive 1

Suspect vandal/block evader[edit]

I suspect that new user Sparrowbeach is a block evader/vandal. 151.34.253.71 (talk) 11:45, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads-up. If this editor is indeed a block evader/vandal then their block will likely be extended. Blue Riband► 16:43, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hatsune Miku: Colorful Stage last edit was perfect and accurate, why did you revert it?[edit]

Why did you revert the last edit on the page Hatsune Miku: Colorful Stage! using the POV as pretext? It was perfect and accurate and was made with the exact purpose to satisfy all parts in disagreement, with no sign of perceptible bias, even less than before. Why did you do that? What was wrong with it? 151.18.10.217 (talk) 12:22, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 151.18.10.217, I reverted the last edit because it contained unsourced content and WP:POV pushing. The last editor from ISP 151.44.78.107 stated that he/she "Did not include sources yet". Sources need to be included when the edit is made, not whenever the editor gets around to it. If you are editing from both ISP addresses it is also a violation of Wikipedia policy to use multiple accounts. The use of multiple accounts outside of established policy for doing so is known as sockpuppetry, and is not permitted. See WP:MULTIPLE. Blue Riband► 12:33, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I added the sources now. And I don't use multiple accounts, I edit from the phone, I don't know why should appear I use multiple accounts, I use only one account with the same phone. I don't know what POV you're talking about, everything I wrote is documented and known facts, even sourced, like the American/Western critics who started it all and the ganguro style with lion and Afro items. Everyone knows it. 151.18.10.217 (talk) 15:00, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The edit that I had reverted came from ISP 151.44.78.107. If the same device is using wifi then the ISP shown will be that of whomever is hosting the wifi service. I would encourage you to create an account and thus not get blamed for edits made by others. When disputes over content arise, editors are expect to start a discussion about those differences on the article's talk page (in this case here: Talk:Hatsune Miku: Colorful Stage!). Edit warring without discussion is seen as disruptive editing. You mentioned that ganguro style is something "everyone knows". How do you expect them to know? It's not likely that they will unless the person is familiar with that genre. Blue Riband► 13:10, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is it because the address changes everytime I move? I still don't get how this works and I don't feel the necessity to create a user name yet. Anyway, I didn't say everyone knows ganguro style, I said that now everyone knows the misunderstanding about it after that event.

Yes. Every time you connect to a different wifi point the ISP address will change. The creation of a Wikipedia user account will solve the multiple ISP problem. Blue Riband► 13:21, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but everything's fine now? I did good this time? And if yes, can also Yiosie2356 be informed?

Please contact Yiosie2356 yourself on his/her talk page. Better yet, invite Yiosie2356 to a discussion on the article talk page. Civil discussion among editors is how consensus is reached on Wikipedia. Blue Riband► 13:29, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can I first have your opinion on my last work to know if I respected the requests this time (I really hope so) so I can ask him/her the same?

I'm not familiar with the anime genra and have not picked through the edits to see if the sources actually do support the new content. What I had reverted earlier was addition of content without sources - something that is a lot easier to check. Again, I would encourage you to

1) start a discussion at Talk:Hatsune Miku: Colorful Stage! and,

2) copy the argument you made on Yiosie2356's talk page to the article talk page and invite him/her to go there and join the discussion.

Disputes about article content are best made on the article talk page so that the comments are all in one place rather than scattered among all the different user talk pages of the concerned parties. Blue Riband► 15:30, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I hope he/she reads and accepts my invite.

The Signpost: 24 April 2022[edit]

Damian Torres[edit]

Hello, Blue Riband,

Thank you for tagging this page for speedy deletion. However, you neglected to post a notification about the tagging on the talk page of the page creator. This is an important step in the deletion process. Most new page patrollers and admins use Twinkle to do this, when they tag pages. Once you set up your Twinkle Preferences to check off "Notify page creator", then Twinkle will post these talk page notices for you. Twinkle has some other nice features like maintaining a log for you of pages that you've tagged for deletion. Please consider using it or, if you don't want to, post a notice on the page creator's talk page yourself. Thanks! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:59, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz - You were too fast for me. I went to that editor's talk page and by the time I had the right formatting for the template the article was already gone. I had requested the CSD manually as I wasn't sure which category applied. The editor clearly did a lot of work but doesn't understand the notability criteria or sourcing a stand-alone bio requires. Blue Riband► 04:08, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz I'm not sure on why the page was deleted and didn't see anything in my inbox. Are you guys ok to provide some feedback and things that I can change in the future for further articles that I might possible write? Is their any way that I can retrieve the article? The only reason I ask is that I made the article for my dad so that his hard work can be reconsidered and all of the accomplishments that he has done in his life and thought I'd give it a go?

Thanks for hearing me out guys,

Ethan. User:Ethan0431 (talk) 04:18, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@User98908655227 / Ethan0431- The article was deleted under catagegory "A7", which means that it didn't note why Torres was notable under Wikipedia's WP:ANYBIO standards. When I read your article it just outlined his culinary career but didn't mention any awards, critical reviews, media interviews, or independent profiles that would elevate him to being outstanding and notable among professional peers. There are hard-working chefs who make dining an enjoyable experince but Wikipedia has a high bar for anyone to have their own article.

It also lacked any sourcing. When an editor has trouble finding reliable and independent sources then, generally, the person they want to write about isn't notable. You clearly put a lot of work into it and you might ask the deleting administrator to "userfy" it for you - this would make it a user page and not in wikipedia mainspace. But I did see in the page history that it had been previously been rejected at Articles for Creation so the answer might be no. I would suggest that you look at the pages of Gordon Ramsay or Paul Prudhomme or other notable chefs as guidelines before you compose the bio again. Why he is notable should be mentioned within the first 2-3 sentances. It must have reliable sources to verify the content. See Referencing for Beginners for ideas on where to look for sources. Blue Riband► 05:02, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]