User talk:Johnpacklambert/Archive 7

HotCat

Adding categories, meow!!! cyɾʋs ɴɵtɵ₃at ^BULAGA!!! 02:07, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As an FYI, I did come back and work on this article. The right sources were obscured quite a bit by the number of articles about his books, but I think I found some good sources to round the article out.--CaroleHenson (talk) 02:14, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Beauty Pageant AfD's

JPL, Thank you for that background. I have recently returned after a years-long wikibreak, so I am not familiar with some of the personalities. BTW, the RfC you indicated had a redlink. Did it get deleted some point in the past? Thanks again. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 01:09, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is still there. I am probably getting too frustrated at some people. I will try and see if I can create the right link.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:10, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I see it now. Thanks. I see that the consensus was that an explicit standard needed to be set. I'm just getting back into things here, so I'm not feeling like the one to restart that. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 01:14, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Go further down, item 61 proposes a standard.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:16, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, I didn't read down far enough. I think it is an extremely reasonable standard, and will go there and say that. Maybe we can get other parties to chime in. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 01:19, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think that discussion has gotten to the point where starting a draft guideline is possible, so I went ahead and created one at Draft:Notability (beauty pageant participants). It looks like there is general agreement with your proposal. Cheers Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Some gingerbread cookies for you

	Gingerbread cookies
	Somebody needs to recognize your efforts for taking the pageant bull by horns. Thanks! Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 03:56, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Great working with you. Happy Holidays/New Year to you and yours. Quis separabit? 06:20, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Holiday card

Wishing you a Charlie Russell Christmas,
Johnpacklambert!

"Here's hoping that the worst end of your trail is behind you
That Dad Time be your friend from here to the end
And sickness nor sorrow don't find you.
—C.M. Russell, Christmas greeting 1926.
Montanabw^(talk) 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Best Wishes

Johnpacklambert,

I wish you the best this holiday season.

May the new year bring you nearer to your dreams.

BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 01:09, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry, merry!

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 18:47, 26 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Talkback

Hello, Johnpacklambert. You have new messages at Beemer69's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Draft:Notability_(beauty_pageant_participants)

Happy New Year. It's been about 10 days since anyone has made any suggestions at the Draft. I think it may be time to start moving it from draft status. There has been no attempt to change the line: "Winners of sub-national level pageants or subsidiary awards...are usually not notable for such per se..." I welcome your advice as to what the next step should be. Other efforts to publicize the "debate" have drawn little to no response, so I'm of the mind to simply move it to WP space and be done with it. Thanks. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:31, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alea iacta est over here. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 04:08, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Indian television actresses

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Indian television actresses requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 removed 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. Tagishsimon (talk) 10:29, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Elijah Abel

I'm reviewing this article. Perhaps you have some thought on the subject: Talk:Elijah_Abel#GA_Review. 10W40 (talk) 04:04, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fighting systemic bias

I just saved the article on Mongolia's current foreign minister from being prod deleted on the alleged ground of no sources. The issue of weather Mongolian government sources can be used for such a purpose is still open. I found ones from Russia, China, Nepal and a mention in a Reuters article. This is actually Tsend Mucnkh-Orgil's 2nd term as foriegn minister, and he has also been Mongolia's justice minister. No one from Europe or the United States who was even a 10th as notable would be put to prod deletion on no sources claims, and definately not have the article last 4 days there.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:19, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nicole Bosso DiGiacobbe

This individual contacted me on my facebook page and threatened to go to the press if I did not restore the article on her. I really do not appreciate people trying to use Wikipedia as a platform for their self promotion. I just hope some people in the press will not run with another story to try to smear Wikipedia as sexist, and will actually take time to consider what is meant by reliable stories. When the coverage of her is her blog, her Linkedin page, an add article on her wedding, or a one sentance add article on someone elses wedding we are not talking about reliable, 3rd party sourcing. There is some 3rd party sourcing, but it is weak, and all focused on her being Miss Delaware USA. The following is a copy of what she said there "You're friends on Facebook Owner/Photographer at This Lovely Life Studied at Rutgers School of Law–Camden JAN 20TH, 11:31PM

Hi John,

I wanted to reach out to you about my wikipedia page. You deleted it and said there was nothing notable about me. That was pretty hurtful, considering I competed in Miss USA, was on a reality TV show on the CW Network, interned at the DE Supreme Court and am family friends with former VP Joe Biden. I also have 24,000+ followers on instagram, run a successful blog called This Lovely Life, and modeled at the Home Shopping Network.

I wanted to come to you first before taking this further to see if we could resolve this. Please get back to me as soon as you can because my wikipedia is linked on my media kit and resume and is now a broken link that many have pointed out to me. Thank you in advance for being understanding. Nicole MON 1:13PM You accepted Nicole's request. Eikipedia is not a place for self promotion. Being friends with the family of a vice president and being a contestant in Miss USA do not make one notable. You need to find another way to promote yourself and not try to misuse Wikipedia as a tool of self promotion. 10:07AM

"Competing in Miss USA does not make one notable." Interesting. I will see if the press agrees. And being a successful blogger with 25,000 fans, with photography work featured on Huffington Post, and USA Today is not notable? Graduating law school is not notable and interning at the DE Supreme Court for Chief Justice is not notable? Wow. I'm looking forward to seeing what the press has to say about all of this. You seem to try very very hard to suppress any success women have had. Very unfortunate.

Oh and participating on the CW's Network TV show is nothing to be noted either right? Yet celebrities and reality TV show stars get their own page. Hmm... I find your logic flawed entirely and really look forward to talking to the press.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:59, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say none of this makes a person notable. "Photography works featured on Huffington Post and USA Today". Is she claiming she is a photo-journalist? Where are the 3rd party reliable sources that cover her as such? She wants us to declare her notable just because she graduated law school. Graduating law school is 100% not notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:01, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hitomi Tanaka (3rd nomination)

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hitomi Tanaka (3rd nomination). As you have participated in a previous AfD on this article, you may be interested to comment on this third AfD. Thank you. Class455 (talk|stand clear of the doors!) 00:02, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been topic banned

Per the clear consensus in this ANI discussion, you have been indefinitely banned from nominating any articles at WP:AFD to a maximum of ONE article in any given calendar day, determined by UTC. If you wish to nominate a group of articles in one discussion, you must refrain from any further AFDs for the same number of days as the count of articles nominated. This restriction does not apply to nominating articles through WP:CSD or WP:PROD. Failure to adhere to this ban may result in additional sanctions, not excluding an indefinite block. Details on how to appeal this topic ban can be found here: Wikipedia:Banning_policy#Appeals_of_bans_imposed_by_the_community. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 20:00, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like a bad practice to make it indefinite like that; I hope that was lifted. Зенитная Самоходная Установка (talk) 09:26, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of page of Mr. Ajay Dhumal

Dear Mr. John,

I hope this finds you well.

Mr. Ajay Dhumal, is a well known industrialist in Maharashtra, India. Apart from being the Chairman & Managing Director of K.P. Group of Companies, he is very well known to the people of Maharashtra for his social work such as contribution to clean India initiative (Swatch Bharat Abhyan), Make in India movement led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and also recent appointment by the Prime Ministers of India's office under the environment department.

The appointment letter by the Secretary of State of Environment, Government of India, can be sent to you as well.

Please see the following links and articles, SOME OF WHICH ARE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA WEBSITES. I am sure after reading them you will be convinced that such a magnanimous but down to earth and low profile person should be listed on Wikipedia to inspire youth and be as a role model to look up to rather than many people listed who serve just the other purpose.

· http://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/solar-energy-parks-gain-momentum-116031400140_1.html →→→→→(KP POWER HAS BEEN LISTED ON BUSINESS STANDARD NEWSPAPERS IN INDIA AND E-MAGAZINE)

· http://ceojournals.com/business-directory/wpbdp_category/a/ →→→→→(HE HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS AMONG THE IMPORTANT BUSINESSMEN IN INDIA BY CEO-JOURNAL)

· http://ecorpinfo.com/director/AJAY-DHUMAL-SHANKARRAO/01832452 · http://www.cyber-si.com/business/ · http://src.foundation/ImportantContacts · http://caa.org.in/CAA/php/result.php?a%5Bdist_id%5D=29&a%5Bstate_id%5D=4&a%5Bkey%5D=ba70bab7792d263efe2be08f22b79203 · http://www.ijirse.com/volume_detail.php?vny=2016-2-3

· http://www.caa.gov.in/uploaded/doc/registration/MH/Thane.pdf →→→→→ (GOVT. OF INDIA WEBSITE)

· http://www.ijmter.com/papers/volume-4/issue-2/design-and-fabrication-of-river-cleaning-machine.pdf

· http://seci.gov.in/content/innerpage/statewise-solar-parks.php (Paramount Solar is under KP Group) →→→→→ (GOVT. OF INDIA WEBSITE)

· http://pib.nic.in/newsite/Printrelease.aspx?relid=145542 →→→→→(GOVT OF INDIA WEBSITE STATING HOW LARGE A PROJECT HAS BEEN AWARDED TO KP POWER)

· http://ceojournals.com/business-directory/ajay-dhumal/ →→→→→ (LISTED AMONG OTHER MULTI MILLIONAIRES AND MULTI BILLIONAIRES OF THE WORLD BY A REPUTED GLOBAL JOURNAL

Best Kishore,

Environment Department, Government of India. New Delhi, India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikipediaMonitor888 (talk • contribs) 00:26, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've nom'd an article you created for a afd

Nathan Oman--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 23:02, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

follow-up Q - You seem appear a fairly active participant in AfD's. Any thoughts for the community's enlightenment here: User talk:Jimbo Wales#Suggested fix-?--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 00:07, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Hey, I saw how you stuck up for my article "Dr. Dharambir Agnihotri" and I really appreciated. This was my first article so I did need a little guidance so I really appreciate you for that. I saw you made a couple edits on the page as well, thanks for that too. I also was just wondering how you stumbled upon my article? And also I wanted to import a picture but I needed help because I am new to wikipedia so if you could help me with that, that would be great. Thank you so much! -- ps: Let me know if you received the present as promised.Aksharma2323 (talk) 04:15, 25 March 2017 (UTC)Aksharma2323[reply]

I would like to thank you once again. --Aksharma2323 (talk) 17:03, 25 March 2017 (UTC)Aksharma2323[reply]

AFD of Eric Daimler

I'm not canvassing here. Please check again and evaluate the content. Eric Daimler is notable. Please do check current version. I hope, it will satisfy you. I have given a lot of efforts on this Wikipedia page. I'm counting on your honest vote _Rfshearer (talk) 02:53, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Al-Shymaa Kway-Geer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tanga. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:42, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

James J. Leonard Jr.

Hello-I am the creator of the page, and I do not understand what you mean by "mentions in passing"? He has actually been featured in a number of articles, so it wouldn't be that? I did not include all of those in the article because I didn't want it to sound like an ad or resume or cvv. He has been featured on national TV shows as himself so I could list and source more of those? Also---do you mean in the article, or sources/references that you could see linking from the AFD? I'd like to try and improve it if you mean the article. Thank you, ip because I use a whole different name now and don't want to appear as a SP.2601:80:4300:155E:C1B:22F7:4CD0:4798 (talk) 17:50, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I notice an article you have edited, David E. Sorensen and there is basically one source besides the obituary. Leonard has been featured much more widely and nationally than Sorenson, and I do understand the differences, but still I'm feeling a little confused here about why you would vote delete with the comments that you made. I'm hoping for some advice on what would make the article a "keep" for you, or a reconsideration please.2601:80:4300:155E:C1B:22F7:4CD0:4798 (talk) 18:27, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

'Restaurants established in' categeories

JPL, I see you have created some of these categories. I'm writing because you probably don't know but some editors have been categorizing these category pages 'Retail companies established in' the year involved. I think that's dead wrong. Retail and restaurant are totally different types of business. There is a category 'Food and drink companies established in'. That's fine.

Just recently I yanked Retail companies links from a bunch of restaurant categories but one editor restored it[1] and I took it back out again[2]. If you agree with my view, can you help support me if needed....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 23:34, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfD hero

	AfD hero
	Thanks for voting on my AfD! Rhombus (talk) 08:17, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP need scholar Julie M. Smith blp stub

Owing2 2116 AML scholarship book honors for best non-fiction LINK. Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 21:40, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We'd suppose that a Grant Hardy blp would fare well were it nommed for any 2nd afd, then. No? As it would only take a few minutes to create a quick sub with regard to this scholar, we ought to do so. No? :~) --Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 23:13, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jews in Ottoman Palestine has been nominated for discussion

Category:Jews in Ottoman Palestine, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. GreyShark (dibra) 10:48, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion

Hi there. I know you and I participate in a lot of AfD's, and I'd like your opinion before I nominate an article. Hank Thomas has several secondary sources to support notability, but after reading the article and several secondary sources, this person seems notable only for a single event (being on a Freedom Ride bus). He went on to have a successful career as a businessman and art collector, but those on their own would not merit a Wikipedia article. He also did not seem to have had any leadership position within the civil rights movement, or have received any significant awards. I've written articles about civil rights leaders, such as Maxine Smith, George Washington Lee, and R. S. Lewis, and there were multiple, tangible, notable civil rights or civic initiatives. I'm just not finding anything notable about this person except that he was on the bus. I'm not sure if passing WP:BASIC trumps WP:SINGLEEVENT. I'd appreciate your input. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:55, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Margaret Dayton

Could you clarify your edit here please? I found it hard to discern but rather than reverting thought I'd ping you here first. Thanks. Marquardtika (talk) 03:29, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1945 establishments in Puerto Rico

A tag has been placed on Category:1945 establishments in Puerto Rico requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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 removed 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. AusLondonder (talk) 17:09, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:08, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Six years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:40, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

... and seven --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:29, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BSD Record

You previously edited BSD Records. I wanted to inform you I have just nominated it for deletion. Chetsford (talk) 08:09, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfD notice

Hello. You participated in the AfD discussion for Zhang Shang [3]. Another article about the same subject is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony Chang. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:21, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfD for Amos Lim

Hi Johnpacklambert! Thank you for providing your input on the first AfD for Amos Lim on 18 December 2016. The article was deleted on 23 December 2016. Unfortunately, the article was recreated by a disruptive user and I am nominating the article again for its 2nd deletion. Please kindly proceed to the AfD and voice out your opinion on whether the article should be deleted, again. Thanks! DerricktanJCW (talk) 02:36, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcquelle Ward

You participated at the above AfD in the past. Could you examine the following sources and let me know if they alter your opinion of notability? [4] [5] [6] ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 20:30, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your response would be appreciated when you have a moment. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 22:53, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Chinedu Echeruo for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chinedu Echeruo is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chinedu Echeruo until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 11:12, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Elia Gourgouris for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elia Gourgouris is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elia Gourgouris until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rathfelder (talk) 22:17, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Julia Mavimbela

The article Julia Mavimbela has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Notability
This individual is wholly unknown, even inside South Africa for that matter, outside of LDS sectors. Her notability lies only in her being a Mormon convert. Every source is connected with the LDS church. If this were "Mormon Wikipedia," it would surely be notable, but this is Wikipedia.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 47.184.236.191 (talk)

Nomination of Mariel García for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mariel García is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mariel García until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 09:04, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	You guys are doing really great job. Djha12 (talk) 15:32, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Melvin J. Ballard Center for Economic Self-Reliance

Hi, I'm Steve Quinn. Johnpacklambert, thanks for creating Melvin J. Ballard Center for Economic Self-Reliance!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This page does not qualify as a standalone article on Wikipedia because no independent sources cover this topic, therefore, I am restoring this to its redirect status. Please see WP:N for more information. Consider adding information about this topic to the main school article to which it redirects.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Steve Quinn (talk) 01:47, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Johnpacklambert. This message is supposed to go to a red-linked user who created this page from a redirect. Please ignore. Steve Quinn (talk) 01:52, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Kweku Anno

The article Kweku Anno has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

It's filled with unsupported assertions, and hardly any citations; person does not meet notability criteria, see also WP:ALIVE; the refimprove tag has been there since January 2017 giving ample time for page creators to respond

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

If you want to discuss this further, let's do it on the talk page of Kweku Anno. EMsmile (talk) 08:56, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Kweku Anno

The article Kweku Anno has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

It's filled with unsupported assertions, and hardly any citations; person does not meet notability criteria, see also WP:ALIVE; the refimprove tag has been there since January 2017 giving ample time for page creators to respond.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. EMsmile (talk) 11:32, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1977 establishments in the British Virgin Islands

A tag has been placed on Category:1977 establishments in the British Virgin Islands requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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 removed 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. AusLondonder (talk) 11:12, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Erasmus Stone

The article Erasmus Stone has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:ANYBIO.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DrStrauss talk 15:31, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Abington Heights High School) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Abington Heights High School, Johnpacklambert!

Wikipedia editor SamHolt6 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Well written and formatted, reveiwed!

To reply, leave a comment on SamHolt6's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

SamHolt6 (talk) 17:12, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hazel Tucker (2nd nomination)

In 2015, you supported the deletion if the article on Helen Tucker. The vote ended with no consensus. Would you consider voting on my new nomination? -- Zanimum (talk) 01:37, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of state leaders in 1796, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ahom (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:42, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Lynn R. Carson

The article Lynn R. Carson has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Carson fails author notability standards with no significant, reliable, third-party coverage in online or offline sources. Music-wise, he's also not notable, with little modern or old analysis of his work. Three sources the articles cite are a book written by Carson, a one-page passing mention in a book dedicated to Mormon hymns in general, and a directory entry, none of which confer notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DrStrauss talk 17:02, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1616 establishments in Wales

A tag has been placed on Category:1616 establishments in Wales requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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 removed 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. AusLondonder (talk) 08:19, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nung language (Sino-Tibetan), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nung (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:06, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Shahid Buttar

Why did you delete my article on Shahid Buttar? Were the seventeen sources I provided not enough to establish notability? Benjamin (talk) 06:20, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Elizabeth L. Gleicher

The article Elizabeth L. Gleicher has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Under 18s

Doesn't the idea Wikpedia shouldn't include articles on those belittle the contribution under 18s make to public life in sport and the arts? Also, it calls into question every article catagorised as a birth after 1999.

Madeupname3 (talk) 11:53, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I never said that we should not have articles on people under 18. I have just consistently argued that the privacy concerns are greater for such people, and so we need to hold even more firmly to the bars set by BLP policy before creating such.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:12, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Whats good for the goose...

John why are you so strenuously deleting wiki pages and material on wiki bio pages when bio pages you created (like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Pack) still remain undersourced?

Rsarlls (talk) 21:42, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ankur Borwankar

After discussing with the author on his talk page, he understands why he shouldn't have created an autobiography. He's now asking how it can be deleted. Is it preferable to let the AfD run its course, or can it be nominated as WP:G7? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:13, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"selective readings of long running genealogies"

what the heck does this mean?

Rsarlls (talk) 19:02, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It means we should not choose one origin location out of 64 ancestors and categorize by it.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:04, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So what if ALL of them are included? Then its not "Selective"

Same argument applies AFAIC if categories given for all KNOWN ancestries - it's not "selective" then

New Page Reviewing

Hello, Johnpacklambert.

As one of Wikipedia's most experienced Wikipedia editors,
Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 21:19, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Johnpacklambert. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Rika Tachibana

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Rika Tachibana. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 03:49, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a deletionist?

Would you say that you tend to be a deletionist? I have noticed that you tend to deletion on the Wikipedia: Articles for deletion page, and seem more active here than many who put themselves in the category called Wikipedia: Deletionists. Vorbee (talk) 07:49, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Warren Pearson

Hi. I wonder if you think the current incarnation of this bio passes muster? Castlemate (talk) 23:40, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Luckily these Newington College articles are thoroughly wikilinked, and there are even categories for people being in the Old Scholars' Association or being on the School Board, so they identify themselves easily for scrutiny ADS54 talk 06:30, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Eric R. Dursteler (December 10)

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

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

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:Eric R. Dursteler and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
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.

Theroadislong (talk) 14:40, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Johnpacklambert, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! Theroadislong (talk) 14:40, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Soviet military doctors has been nominated for discussion

Category:Soviet military doctors, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 23:33, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Colin_Hemsley

Hi. This discussion may be of interest to you. Regards, Waj (talk) 07:21, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

	Happy Holidays
	Wishing you a happy holiday season! Times flies and 2018 is around the corner. Thank you for your contributions. ~ K.e.coffman (talk) 23:43, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays!

Happy Holidays

This user wishes you a very Happy Holiday season.

Marquardtika (talk) 06:16, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seasons' Greetings

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 03:19, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays!

What better way to celebrate the holidays (and bowl season) than "Touchdown Jesus"!
Best wishes for a happy and healthy 2018!
Cbl62 (talk) 18:44, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2017_December_28#Peter_Hood_Ballantine_Cumming

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2017_December_28#Peter_Hood_Ballantine_Cumming. Rusf10 (talk) 00:41, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Creation Reviewing

Hello, Johnpacklambert.

AfC submissions
Random submission

~6 weeks

1,110 pending submissions

Purge to update

I recently sent you an invitation to join NPP, but you also might be the right candidate for another related project, AfC, which is also extremely backlogged.
Would you please consider becoming an Articles for Creation reviewer? Articles for Creation reviewers help new users learn the ropes of creating their first articles, and identify whether topics are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Reviewing drafts doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia inclusion policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After requesting to be added to the project, reviewing is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the reviewing instructions before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 03:05, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of articles only sourced to IMDB

Indiscriminately proposing deletion of masses of articles simply because they are only sourced to IMDB is not constructive. Please stop it. And start using edit summaries please. --Michig (talk) 10:07, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Claire Windsor, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you.--Michig (talk) 10:50, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removing films from actor's filmographies simply because we don't have articles on them is also not at all helpful. Neither is removing cast members from films simply bcause we don't have articles on them. If you continue with this you will be blocked from editing. --Michig (talk) 14:45, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mass removal of film credits

You have been making mass edits removing thousands of credits from articles on actors, actresses, and films. These edits have not been accompanied by any explanation or edit summaries. Please explain the basis for your removal of credits from these articles, examples of which are listed below:

Leon Ames
Agnes Ayres
Johnny Arthur
Meche Barba
Dircinha Batista
Egon Brecher
Kenneth Casey
Ethel Clayton
Finlay Currie
Sondra Currie
Josef Dahmen
Pedro de Cordoba
Karl Ehmann
William Farnum
Jaime Fernández (actor)
Elizabeth Harrower (actress)
Enrique Herrera
John Hoyt
Kay Hughes
Raymond Huntley
Carl Lange (actor)
George J. Lewis
Albert MacQuarrie
María Elena Marqués
Sarah Padden
Bill Patton (actor)
ZaSu Pitts
Gilbert Roland
Henry Rowland (actor)
Peer Schmidt
Frank Sheridan
Tom Tyler
Lois Weber
Claire Windsor
Carleton Young
Clara Kimball Young
Adventure in the Night: removed 14 credits from Cast
Beyond the Rainbow
Girls of the Big House
It Happened One Night
Kill Me Because I'm Dying!
Lola Casanova
My Mother Is Guilty: removed 12 credits from Cast
No Limit (1931 film)‎
The Pilgrimage Play
Reach for Glory
Summer Hotel
The Unknown Policeman
When I Leave

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in providing justification for these actions. Cbl62 (talk) 14:43, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I note that in this diff, you reverted the restoration of credits to the Claire Windsor article on the ground that the films removed are "unnotable". Such a notability rationale is questionable as applied to an actor's filmography. Further, it is unclear how you are making the determination that certain films are "unnotable". Is it simply because certain films don't have articles on Wikipedia? Cbl62 (talk) 14:52, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not meant to be an indiscriminate listing of information. Long lists with little to no explanation are deprecated.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:54, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your response makes little sense in the context of your recent mass removal of film credits. A list of actors/characters appearing in a film is not an "indiscriminate listing". Likewise, an actor's filmography is not an "indiscriminate listing". The word "indiscriminate" means "done at random or without careful judgment." This is wholly inapplicable to a particular film's cast listing or an actor's filmography. Indeed, these lists are the antithesis of "indiscriminate"; they are "discriminate". Cbl62 (talk) 15:03, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise for two movies now added to the above list; changes to articles on those movies now reverted. Bkengland (talk) 22:34, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is "American" and "US-American" the same?

Hi, I have many latin American friends, and whenever I used the word "American" not specifying that I meant "US-American" they felt insulted and corrected me. I feel they are right. There are ~911,000,000 people living in North- and Southamerica, and ~320,000,000 living in the USA. So why is there need to insult two third of all Americans? You undid where I corrected "...is an American actor" to "...is a US-American actor" stating "The usage in Wikipedia is American" - may I ask to kindly tell me where is it written in the Wikipedia Disclamers? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WissM (talk • contribs) 05:35, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A quick read of every category starting with Category:American politicians to Category:American actors to Category:American singers will show that this is how it is done. Also a read of articles on people from George W. Bush to Dwight D. Eisenhow to Thomas S. Monson to many others will also show this is how it is done.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:38, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't expect that Wikipedia is a place of discrimination and where people have to feel insulted, and all is explained by "because everyone is doing so" ;-) (User WissM) 6 January 2018 (UTC)

WissM, you should read our article Americans. In the English language, the word "American" means a citizen of the United States, or things pertaining to the United States. No one would call a citizen of Brazil an "American citizen" or the food of Guatemala "American food". No one should feel insulted by the plain and ordinary meanings of common English language words. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:51, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, interesting lession learned! I am from Europe, citizen of the European Union, and I never would feel that when I say "European" it only includes members of the European Union and non-EU people (e.g. Switzerland, Norway, Belarus, Serbia etc.) being marginalised. But your US-American thinking in the context of using the word "America" is different. Interesting. (User WissM) 6 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by WissM (talk • contribs)

You need to understand the common meanings of words as used in the English language, WissM. The word "European" refers to anything having to do with the continent of Europe, and that includes non-EU parts of Europe including Switzerland, Norway, and so on. The word "American" in the English language refers to people and things associated with the United States of America. Your personal preferences are irrelevant. Wikipedia uses the terminology that reliable sources use, and no reliable sources call the people whose biographies you have been disrupting "US-Americans". So, stop your disruption now. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:42, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:French women judges has been nominated for discussion

Category:French women judges, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ _Talk 18:30, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Abusive Use of category hotcat to kill ancestral origins

You have been abusing use of Category hotcat to kill categories that say in what countries people are born and and their ancestries.

This is a prime example of your abuse. You used Category HotCat to kill Category:American People of Italian Descent on the article of Arnold Kent because the word Italy or Italian wasn't in the BODY of the article. The first sentence says be was born Lino Manetti in Florence. The dialogue box on the right with bio info shows that he was born Florence, Tuscany, ITALY on 21 January 1899. So your indiscriminate use of HotCat killed a valid category for this article because the algorithm used indiscriminately by you was not capable of picking up that Florence was in Italy, or picked up the info in the info box.

Your hatred of ancestral categories is well noted in your posts and editorial comments. Now it has risen to the level of abuse.

Based on posts I've read in Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Johnpacklambert you have a pathological instinct to delete articles and remove helpful categories.

I look forward to seeking action starting with posting on that page and learning more how to stop your abuse. Clearly suggestions and complains to date have been insufficient to change your destructive behaviors. Rsarlls (talk) 23:45, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I removed Kent from that category on the grounds that his inclusion in the category was duplicative. Kent is already in a subcat for Italian immigrants to the US. No one should be in both a category and a subcat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnpacklambert (talk • contribs) 04:44, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Austrian military physicians

Any particular reason to have Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 January 13#Austrian_military_physicians separate from the later group nom at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 January 13#Estonian_military_physicians?

If not, please make everyone's life easier by combining it with the group. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:43, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It has the peculiarity of being a renomination of a nomination that was not done properly before.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:56, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I see it was tagged in November, but not actually nominated then, and hence no discussion about it. So no need to keep it separate; a wee note would suffice. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:17, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Dixon (hydroponics)

Hi John, I have made a few changes to Adam Dixon (hydroponics), adding links to the Wikipedia pages for the prizes he has been awarded Young champions of the earth and Shell LiveWIRE. One is global, the other is UK wide and both received extensive media coverage. I hope that this convinces you on the issue of notability and might encourage you to change your initial judgment. Many thanks, yours Zosimos102 (talk) 15:54, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Belated best wishes for a happy 2018

== BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 15:18, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alert

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

— Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 09:10, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfD advice

Hi Johnpacklambert, hoping you can advise me. I'm fairly new to editing. You commented on the AfD I created for the article on Joshua Claybourn. I'm reasonably sure that one of the other commenters (who has voted Keep, and also has had a hand in the article) is the subject of the article (his talk page mentions a website he runs, which, on looking at the website, says it is run by Joshua Claybourn). Should I highlight this in the AfD discussion or is it better to assume good faith and leave the community to come to a decision? Many thanks for your help. Tacyarg (talk) 20:43, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your advice, which ws helpful. I've noted the possible CoI on the AfD page. Tacyarg (talk) 22:48, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hart

Why are you removing a bunch of cited categories from these articles without any motivation whatsoever?★Trekker (talk) 01:15, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The articles have extreme category clutter. There is no reason to categorize people by non-notable connection through 3rd great grandfathers. Anyway, all categories need to be applied in a logical way, and these have not been.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:17, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion.★Trekker (talk) 01:18, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are ignoring the very clear rules of category order. An article should not be in both a parent category and a sub-cat.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:19, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that you clearly haven't read these articles clearly enough to actually know what you're talking about. Their materla grandfather was full Irish and they had both Scotch-Irish and Scottish ancestry on their fathers side.

If your going to complain at leats be correct.★Trekker (talk) 01:21, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Scotch-Irish is a sub-set of Scottish. We do not seek to arbitrarily include all possible ancestries. This gets excessively large when we deal with ancestors as far back as this is starting to deal with.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:22, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's clearly stated that they had ancestry from difernt lines. You don't decide what should go and not based on your missunderstanding of the material. And by the way, Scotch-Irish are just as much considered Irish than Scottish. Why should I take you seriously? You've already made several mistakes.★Trekker (talk) 01:26, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If someone has a Scotch-Irish mother and a Scottish father, would you only include Scotch-Irish? No, that doesn't make sense.★Trekker (talk) 01:27, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you would, because you do not needlessly put people in excessive categories when they are already in sub-categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:29, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's nonsensical. Ok, for real, sorry for edit warring but none of these articles have too many categories and it's all cited in the text. Why are you so insistent on fighting with me when it serves no point? Also, form what I can tell the idea to sum up Scotch-Irish people as just a subcategory of either Scottish or Irish seems rather simplistic and ignores that they had their own culture and heritage. I don't intend to revert you anymore but I hope you reconsider because of Wikipedia guidelines really side with you then they are dumb as hell and make no sense.★Trekker (talk) 01:39, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American expatriates in France

You added Category:American expatriates in France in place of Category:American people of French descent. The two on my list never lived in France. --RAN (talk) 01:33, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you give me a specific name, I will review the issue, but I highly doubt they did not live in France.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:34, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Walter S. McIlhenny

Hi, I'm wondering why Walter S. McIlhenny was removed from the category of persons of French descent. His mother, Anita Stauffer McIlhenny, descended from the Bringier family of New Orleans (of French ancestry) and spoke only French to Walter and his brother. Would it help if his entry mentioned this French ancestry? Sincerely, --Skb8721 (talk) 02:45, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

8Yes, the article ought to mention something if we are going to categorize by it.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:47, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll add a reference, if not tonight, then shortly. Thanks. --Skb8721 (talk) 02:49, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Considered for Deletion Zoe Strimpel

Hello. I am the primary author of the Zoe Strimpel article. This article is being considered for deletion because of lack of coverage of her. Since the notice appeared, I added additional press coverage as citations. Please take a look and let me know if this enough enough independent source coverage to show notability. Cheers. Rgonsalv (talk) 03:04, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Robert C. Seacord for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert C. Seacord is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert_C._Seacord until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rogerthat94 (talk) 23:29, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Natasha Pavlovich

Hi, is it possible to have more info as to why the Natasha Pavlovich page was deleted? Should the page be reorganized to first reflect her Miss Universe experience seeing as several Miss Universes already have Wikipedia pages? Not only do these other Miss Universe contestants have pages, but they have no other experience except for being a Miss Universe contestant, whereas Pavlovich has acted in many American TV shows (she even had a recurring role in "Pride and Joy" with Jeremy Piven). For examples of other Miss Universe Wikipedia pages or pages similar to Pavlovich's acting experience, you can vist the links listed here : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Natasha_Pavlovich

Plus, looking through wikipedia, there are other actresses with even less experience in supporting roles that already have Wikipedia pages. Pavlovich's filmography includes over 50 roles so is there a reason as to why her greater experience might count as less? You can see her filmography by clicking on the link also posted in : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Natasha_Pavlovich

A partial filmography is also found on TCM : http://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/person/1310276%7C0/Natasha-Pavlovich/

A page also exists for Pavlovich in the Serbian wikipedia so is an English version then possible?

Thanks for your time! Abonzz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abonzz (talk • contribs) 16:26, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1899 establishments in the Cretan State has been nominated for discussion

Category:1899 establishments in the Cretan State, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 13:39, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	For helping to keep Wikipedia tidy by participating tirelessly at AfD, and not being afraid to ¡vote keep once in a while when the article deserves it. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 15:20, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FYI she was a sockpuppet.104.163.148.25 (talk) 16:38, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Park

Last time around you said keep. Now he's published a monograph at Cambridge. Within your current understanding of GNG/PROF Do you still think Oman's blp (which I'm *not* going to nom -

cos *I* think Oman's bk pub enough!) should be kept?--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 00:16, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I laid out all my reasoning on both issues, and I still say delete Park and keep Oman. One monograph is not enough to pass the notability guidelines for academics. Oman clearly and without question passes such guidelines. Park clearly does not.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:18, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oman's case is still not clear to me (I was hoping you'd help me see it) but you seem to have an edge to your voice, so I won't ask you to help me understand.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 00:22, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your !vote was backed by in-depth, comprehensive understanding of the sourcing, I'll grant you that much.

As for Oman's, I just took a gander over there. It seems https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/128.239.104.188 an ip addr recently has contributed some heavy duty stuff that's been done by Oman over the last couple of years. So yeah I'd say guess myself his blp should be a slam dunk. Of course, some !voters go by ideosyncratic tea leaves in whatever afd (i.e according to Fowler bro.s' usage (...rather click the handy ref provided in the text and see what entity sponsors whatever Mo.studies award is in question)?--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 00:53, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I respond to DGG and you (everybody else didn't bother to explain their !votes in any detail) in the afd thread.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 01:58, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ardis Parshall

Haven't googled Ardis E. Parshall ("independent historian and author of the Keep-a-Pitchin-In Mormon history blog. ") lately, well, until just now. But let's say she's been specifically profiled or subject to sufficient MSM coverage (eg i recall that Ardis did cosign the SCotUS amicus brief Oman had co-authored: a lot of stuff like that). If so: !vote to keep? (Me: Yes!) Or, to delete?

Likely !vote by user:DGG? Likely yours, then (hetorical quandary; you'd not "have to" answer--at least, specifically)?--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 03:09, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an interview of Ardis Parshall by Peggy Stack. WP has such a small percentage of blp's about women . IMHO it's a travesty that wp:Basic so often is subverted in the interest of snooty exclusivity. (Come to think of it, maybe this inclination is in some ways an analogue of "not in my backyard"ism. Just a thought!)--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 03:44, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re your afd nom

Since !voting often as not gets so weighted by my mere nose counts, Could you go back and edit your nom and at least mention her 2017 Greg Kofford title? (I just added it to Ardis's blp.) That way those whose threshold involves a pair of scholarly books won't get there !votes in before its too late to get back to them. Thanks! (I mean, if you can).--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 05:26, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of John Rakolta

The article John Rakolta has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication this individual meets any notability standard.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. John from Idegon (talk) 00:55, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jayne Marie Fleming Lange

The article Jayne Marie Fleming Lange has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I don’t understand why this article was redirected to Roberts’ page since I see no mention of her there. No one answered my comment on the talk page, where I asked why. So, IMHO, there is no reason for this to exist.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MensanDeltiologist (talk) 21:54, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Immigrants to the United Kingdom from Aden has been nominated for discussion

Category:Immigrants to the United Kingdom from Aden, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Störm (talk) 15:39, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ethnic Armenian lawyers has been nominated for discussion

Category:Ethnic Armenian lawyers, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. TM 13:26, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Scandal

Hi. Thanks for your edit at Joseph Bishop. Could you look over the article "Joseph Bishop sexual abuse allegations" and trim and/or expand it for any accuracy, weight, NPOV, etc. converns?--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 03:33, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Joseph Bishop for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joseph Bishop is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Bishop until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

McKendrick

Well, he did succeed McKay at Weber, for some kind of "inherited" notability. And, in the church itself, he did serve as counsellor in the Ogden Stake presidency.[7]. Ought be nommed, I'd suppose.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 06:55, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AFD of Elaine Herzberg

I am sure you watch the page but is there any room for possible consideration of alternatives. The AFD was (in my opinion) prematurely closed and I had to request it be reopened. I agree with your comments concerning "not a newspaper" that to me includes "not a newspaper obituary". The sources do indicate the issues with self-driving/autonomous vehicles/cars not just limited to Uber can develop into more than a pseudo-biography obituary. I think these issues deserve more than a paragraph entry, but more I think that a "no consensus" titled as a biography is certainly against policies and guidelines. Anyway, I may be barking up a wrong tree that seeking collaboration and editor consensus over an admin chosen decision is a worthwhile endeavor but it can't hurt to try. If you deem this worth a second look maybe you can weigh in on the idea? Thanks, Otr500 (talk) 19:27, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mount St. Mary's College has been nominated for discussion

Category:Mount St. Mary's College, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Arbor to SJ (talk) 00:30, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Raj Kumar Sharma

Hello friend, I hope you are well. I'll be ever so grateful if you will please help me to prevent the Raj Kumar Sharma article for remaining as an overstuffed puff piece. Personally I don't think this guy is even notable, but right now I'm mainly bothered by one editor who re-adds unreferenced and non-encyclopedic information. Thank you very much, and best wishes, George Custer's Sabre 14:19, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Ulisses Soares for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ulisses Soares is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ulisses Soares until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Saturnalia0 (talk) 13:13, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfD for Ulisses Soares

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ulisses Soares--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 21:07, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hardy

Following user:DGG's suggestion I pinged his Talk - diff - w news I felt ready to throw open Draft:Grant Hardy "live." What would you think?--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 00:51, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment

Draft talk:Grant Hardy#BLP reads more like an essay than an encyclopedic treatment of the person in question(?)--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 01:23, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jgturner

Turner, the WSJ piece's author-& 3X award winner[8]-ought hv a wikiblp.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 19:55, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

D**n wsj paywall. May stop by library.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 20:43, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Was able to extract this sentence via Google search results: "Ulisses Soares was born in Brazil and worked as an international accountant, holding church positions in South America, Africa, Portugal and Salt Lake City."--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 20:56, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Will be interesting to see if Turner's B.Y. bio becomes overshadowed, in the research area, by Grow's upcoming one.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 20:06, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I expect Grow's bio of BY to set a new standard. There are enough issues with Turner's bio that I expect Grow to be able to supercede it. Grow was the co-author of the very top notch bio of Parley P. Pratt. He studied in part under Richard L. Bushman, who has set a new top standard in Mormon biography with Rough Stone Rolling. Beyond this he was involved in publishing materials related to the Council of 50. Whatever Turner said on it, it was not fully informed by the most recently available documents. Turner also is felt by some to not have given enough insight and understanding into the 1870s institution of new stakes and other Church reforms done by Brigham Young then. This is probably in part because of the approach Turner is coming from. To many, Leonard J. Arrington's Brigham Young: American Moses is still a top work, but there are issues it addresses less than could be, and it is difficult to see some of its treatment of some issues as fully reflecting existing scholarship. Grow being at the center of the Joseph Smith papers project, and having easy access to the Church archives and other related documents will give him a lot of depth of knowledge.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:15, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed on all points (from my armchair, with no inside info or much of any kind of background in this stuff.

Yep, I see ur right re Walker' s Grant bio. Ben Park: "Between writing his [Walker's] dissertation on the Godbeites in the 1970s and the actual publication of the book in the 1990s, Walker took serious the call to do more 20th century history, and set out to write a biography of one of its most important, and still under-studied, figures: Heber J. Grant. ... ... ... He originally set out to write an exhaustive biography of Brigham Young, but was recruited instead to co-author the Church’s authoritative account of its most tragic episode [the MMM]. ... ... ... Even after his diagnosis a couple of years after the project’s completion, Walker remained feverish with his work on other topics, most especially Brigham Young. ... ... ...his entire career was, in a way, meant to climax with the Young biography that was never completed. Most of his work–on leadership culture, native relations, political conflict, authority and dissent, pioneer life–were concentric circles zeroing in on the life of Mormonism’s most contentious figure. We, as a history community, have been robbed of a critically-acclaimed play’s final act, when all the sophisticated themes were to finally weave together."[9]

btw where Grow says "I am working on a biography of Brigham Young that was begun by historian Ron Walker, who died last year" is-->here!--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 04:46, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For a likely pirated & slightly mangled version of Turner's WSJ piece, copy'n'paste into your browser's search or ipaddress windows the following addr (after "nowiki") 'n' click.--> nowiki https://infoglitz.com/zimbabwe/the-global-future-of-mormonism-wsj/ /nowiki. --Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 05:14, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:GNG - Ante Bakmaz

Hi Johnpacklambert,

In recognition of your concerns regarding this article, I have searched for (and since added) a number of additional references outside of the typical match reports etc. I was wondering if you would consider these articles enough to satisfy the WP:GNG criteria.

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Harsens Island, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Native Americans (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, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I re-created Grant Hardy

--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 21:03, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mason's plate seems fairly full. "His [Mason's] current [2016] writing projects include a college-level textbook that will serve as an introduction to Mormonism, a book (co-authored with David Pulsipher) constructing a Mormon theology and ethic of peace, and a biography of Ezra Taft Benson."[10]--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 05:27, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Mason, April 17: "If I’m going to be completely honest with myself, I have to admit that I was working on a biography of Ezra Taft Benson. For a variety of reasons, which mostly included my own workload but also lack of access to his private papers in the Church Archives, the project has been put on the backburner. Other scholars, especially Matt Harris, have lapped me on their Benson research at this point."[11]--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 23:54, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussions

The best suggestion I have to offer is to use WP:Twinkle instead of manually formatting a nomination. If you do that, Twinkle will automatically perform the creator notification for you as part of the process. I've never known any easier way to get it done. Bearcat (talk) 18:50, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:University of Alaska alumni has been nominated for discussion

Category:University of Alaska alumni, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:17, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Joseph Holbrook, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nassau, New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Víctor Afrânio Asconavieta da Silva for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Víctor Afrânio Asconavieta da Silva is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Víctor Afrânio Asconavieta da Silva until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:34, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Desiderio Arce for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Desiderio Arce is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Desiderio Arce until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:44, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

request about an AFD started by a sock

Hi, you participated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mitu Bhowmick Lange after that AFD was started by a now-blocked sock, one of a number of AFDs started by the linked sock accounts. Perhaps they were trying to confuse about their contributions as part of bigger plan to get rid of one target article. Then they AFD'd a bunch of articles started by me, because i called them a likely sock and participated at the SPI. Most of these AFDs have been closed as Technical Keep or similar after they were confirmed as socks, where there were no "delete" votes by anyone else. I wonder if you would please help resolve this one AFD by your withdrawing your "Delete" vote and then closing it yourself, which you could do as then there would be no outstanding Delete votes. It is your right not to, on basis of your sincere judgment about the quality of the article, but I think you might agree the article is not too horrible and that this AFD about it is not the way forward about it. Maybe it could be tagged, and leave possibility of a future AFD. It just seems crummy for good editors to be stuck continuing a discussion started by an abuser of the community, and with the discussion and voting confused, so I thought I'd try asking for your help. No problem if you choose not to. Thanks for considering. --Doncram (talk) 23:18, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Smoke Dawg

I know we've collaborated on a number of AfD's, so I'd appreciate your opinion. I keep a careful watch on List of murdered hip hop musicians, and today a new named appeared, Smoke Dawg (it seems some ne'er-do-wells are taking the hatnote "this list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it" quite literally). After a bit of general cleanup to Smoke Dawg I was left feeling that the article completely lacks notability. I'd appreciate your opinion, and realize it would be in very poor taste to AfD the article today. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 20:55, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

John Iadarola

Per the discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Iadarola (2nd nomination) as Iadarola's career has grown, I have added additional sources covering his primary hosting of "True North" and "The Damage Report" series with additional non TYT sources. This is in addition to his daily hosting duties on the TYT main show. I have reactivated the article to mainspace. Trackinfo (talk) 07:54, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Interviews independent sources?

It is a long standard of GNG that interviews do not add to notability. I tend to agree with this but can you give chapter and verse? If it is not explicitly in WP:GNG it might be desirable to add it. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:23, 15 July 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Overturned deletion

In January you took part in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stanislav Shekshnia, and the article was deleted. The article was later re-created and speedily deleted as a repost of content deleted as a result of a deletion discussion. That speedily deletion has now been unilaterally overturned by another administrator, and the article is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stanislav Shekshnia (2nd nomination). I am informing those who tool part in the earlier discussion. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:17, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Ankit Love

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ankit Love. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. MB190417 (talk) 22:58, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John K. Edmunds for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John K. Edmunds is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John K. Edmunds until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:14, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Reyna I. Aburto for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Reyna I. Aburto is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reyna I. Aburto until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:19, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hilton A. Robertson for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hilton A. Robertson is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hilton A. Robertson until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:35, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Grietje Terburg Rowley for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Grietje Terburg Rowley is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grietje Terburg Rowley until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:43, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think she deserves to stay, and wrote my thoughts in the AFD. --1l2l3k (talk) 14:13, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jorge F. Zeballos for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jorge F. Zeballos is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jorge F. Zeballos until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:52, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Joel H. Johnson for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joel H. Johnson is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joel H. Johnson until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:07, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Yanagida Toshiko for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Yanagida Toshiko is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yanagida Toshiko until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:58, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Bruce L. Olsen for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bruce L. Olsen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bruce L. Olsen until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:36, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hugo Montoya for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hugo Montoya is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hugo Montoya until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:19, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Alma O. Taylor for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alma O. Taylor is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alma O. Taylor until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:53, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Chiyo Miyako

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Chiyo Miyako. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Andrew D. (talk) 17:45, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Fernando R. Gómez for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fernando R. Gómez is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fernando R. Gómez until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:02, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Marcos A. Aidukaitis for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marcos A. Aidukaitis is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcos A. Aidukaitis (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:37, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mark Dietlein for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mark Dietlein is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Dietlein until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:49, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Nan Greene Hunter for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nan Greene Hunter is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nan Greene Hunter until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:56, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Arnulfo Valenzuela for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Arnulfo Valenzuela is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arnulfo Valenzuela until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:08, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Won Yong Ko for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Won Yong Ko is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Won Yong Ko until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:36, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of José L. Alonso for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article José L. Alonso is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/José L. Alonso until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:42, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Overcategorization

Hi there! I just removed some of the categories you added to Ralph Vary Chamberlin, as Overcategorization. Subjects should generally categorized by defining traits or other central characteristics, rather than trivial, ephemeral, or arbitrarily intersecting traits (see WP:Defining). Thus, a Latter Day Saint who worked in Pennsylvania for 2 years probably shouldn't go in Category:Latter Day Saints from Pennsylvania, as their religion has no relevance to their residence, but might warrant it if their noteworthy accomplishments in Pennsylvania were LDS related (a rough rule of thumb for categories is "would a book on (category name) plausibly include this topic?"). If you've made such additions to other articles, please take a moment to reconsider the relevance and appropriateness, and consider paring down to only the most defining category/ies. Cheers! --Animalparty! (talk) 20:28, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1993 establishments in the Palestinian territories has been nominated for discussion

Category:1993 establishments in the Palestinian territories, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. GreyShark (dibra) 16:04, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Lynn A. Mickelsen for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lynn A. Mickelsen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lynn A. Mickelsen until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:46, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sam K. Shimabukuro for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sam K. Shimabukuro is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam K. Shimabukuro until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:56, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kenneth Johnson (Mormon) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kenneth Johnson (Mormon) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenneth Johnson (Mormon) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:05, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Clate W. Mask Jr. for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Clate W. Mask Jr. is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clate W. Mask Jr. until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:22, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John J. Kerrigan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John J. Kerrigan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John J. Kerrigan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Redditaddict69 ^(talk) ^(contribs) 00:36, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Tayva Patch for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tayva Patch is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tayva Patch until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Kirbanzo (talk) 01:08, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sheldon F. Child for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sheldon F. Child is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheldon F. Child until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:21, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Annie Pinnock Malin for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Annie Pinnock Malin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annie Pinnock Malin until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:35, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of José A. Teixeira for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article José A. Teixeira is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/José A. Teixeira until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:44, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ida R. Alldredge for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ida R. Alldredge is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ida R. Alldredge until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:13, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Michael John U. Teh for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Michael John U. Teh is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael John U. Teh (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:19, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kazuhiko Yamashita for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kazuhiko Yamashita is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kazuhiko Yamashita until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:08, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Claudio D. Zivic for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Claudio D. Zivic is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Claudio D. Zivic until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:22, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Phinehas Richards for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Phinehas Richards is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phinehas Richards until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:44, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Carlos A. Godoy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Carlos A. Godoy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlos A. Godoy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:29, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Establishments in Lower Burma by year

Re Category:Establishments in Lower Burma by year and its two sub-cats, please see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 October 10. – Fayenatic London 09:58, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Allan F. Packer for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Allan F. Packer is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allan F. Packer until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:10, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Carl B. Pratt for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Carl B. Pratt is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carl B. Pratt until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:15, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Carlos L. Pedraja for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Carlos L. Pedraja is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlos L. Pedraja until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:22, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hans Henry Petersen for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hans Henry Petersen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hans Henry Petersen until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:38, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ljiljana Crnogaj Fulepp for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ljiljana Crnogaj Fulepp is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ljiljana Crnogaj Fulepp until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:05, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Wolfgang H. Paul for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wolfgang H. Paul is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wolfgang H. Paul (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:51, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Paul Schettler for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paul Schettler is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Schettler until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:05, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Carlos H. Amado for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Carlos H. Amado is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlos H. Amado (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:50, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Valeri V. Cordón for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Valeri V. Cordón is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valeri V. Cordón until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:32, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Eduardo Ayala for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Eduardo Ayala is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eduardo Ayala until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:13, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of F. Burton Howard for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article F. Burton Howard is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/F. Burton Howard until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:54, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Robert J. Whetten for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert J. Whetten is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert J. Whetten until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:25, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hans F. Petersen for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hans F. Petersen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hans F. Petersen until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:37, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Cheryl A. Esplin for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cheryl A. Esplin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cheryl A. Esplin until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:12, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of LeGrand R. Curtis Jr. for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article LeGrand R. Curtis Jr. is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LeGrand R. Curtis Jr. until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:14, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Lawrence E. Corbridge for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lawrence E. Corbridge is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lawrence E. Corbridge until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:45, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kevin W. Pearson for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kevin W. Pearson is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin W. Pearson until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:03, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kevin R. Duncan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kevin R. Duncan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin R. Duncan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:22, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sydney S. Reynolds for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sydney S. Reynolds is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sydney S. Reynolds until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:25, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kevin L. Barney for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kevin L. Barney is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin L. Barney until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:15, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Shayne M. Bowen for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shayne M. Bowen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shayne M. Bowen until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:51, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Spencer V. Jones for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Spencer V. Jones is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spencer V. Jones until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:05, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John K. Edmunds for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John K. Edmunds is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John K. Edmunds (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:18, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ward E. Pack has been accepted

Ward E. Pack, 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!

Legacypac (talk) 05:42, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spinetta Malaspina

Hello my friend, I saw you created the original article for the page I was finished translating today (Spinetta Malaspina, yes I had to rename it...) and wanted to get your thoughts on it, i tried my hardest to make it as close to the Italian version as possible as it is the most complete and competent version, I am taking care of pages like Conrad Malaspina and Malaspina Family so its nice to see some people sharing the interest <3 Spaicol (talk) 22:45, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Erich W. Kopischke for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Erich W. Kopischke is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erich W. Kopischke until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:14, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of W. Don Ladd for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article W. Don Ladd is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/W. Don Ladd until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:59, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Earl M. Monson for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Earl M. Monson is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Earl M. Monson until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:24, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Spencer H. Osborn for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Spencer H. Osborn is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spencer H. Osborn until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:30, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Ethnic Armenian film directors

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Category:Ethnic Armenian film directors, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it 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.

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Johnpacklambert. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Marcus B. Nash for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marcus B. Nash is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcus B. Nash until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:43, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Take part in a survey

Hi Johnpacklambert

We're working to measure the value of Wikipedia in economic terms. We want to ask you some questions about how you value being able to edit Wikipedia.

Our survey should take about 10-15 minutes of your time. We hope that you will enjoy it and find the questions interesting. All answers will be kept strictly confidential and will be anonymized before the aggregate results are published. Regretfully, we can only accept responses from people who live in the US due to restrictions in our grant-based funding.

As a reward for your participation, we will randomly pick 1 out of every 5 participants and give them $25 worth of goods of their choice from the Wikipedia store (e.g. Wikipedia themed t-shirts). Note that we can only reward you if you are based in the US.

Click here to access the survey: https://mit.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_eXJcEhLKioNHuJv

Thanks

Avi

Researcher, MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy --Avi gan (talk) 05:16, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Auto unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Johnpacklambert (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider or colocation provider. To prevent abuse, web hosts and colocation providers may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. You will not be able to edit Wikipedia using a web host or colocation provider. Since the web host acts like a proxy, because it hides your IP address, it has been blocked. To prevent abuse, these IPs may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. If you do not have any other way to edit Wikipedia, you will need to request an IP block exemption.

If you do not believe you are using a web host, you may appeal this block by adding the following text on your talk page: {{unblock}}. You must fill in the blank with your IP address for this block to be investigated. Your IP address can be determined using whatismyip.com. Alternatively, if you wish to keep your IP address private you can use the unblock ticket request system. If you are using a Wikipedia account you will need to request an IP block exemption by either using the unblock template or by submitting an appealing using the unblock ticket request system.

Accept reason:

Temporary IPBE has been granted. SQL ^{Query me!} 22:16, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I did the above right.John Pack Lambert (talk)

Comment I removed my first request since it seems this is an autoblock. For what it is worth I am using the same computer I have used for years, and the exact same internet connection set up I have used since July.John Pack Lambert (talk) 07:16, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- This is pretty confusing. I modified your unblock request slightly so that it doesn't have nested unblock requests. It looks like I hard blocked 104.143.192.0/19 as a colocation webhost after a bunch of spammers used it. Are you using privacy-enhancing browser add-ons or anything? They might route your traffic through a webhost. The other major thing that might cause that is if you're editing from work. They might route your traffic through some kind of content-control software service. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:52, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Odd. This is definitely a range owned by telentia, a cloud infrastructure provider. Resolving a random /24, I see what appear to be mail providers. Further resolving a lot of that /19 using nmap, I see a lot of mail providers (mail.example.com etc). @NinjaRobotPirate: - I think IPBE is probably appropriate here (there may be some sort of upstream anonymizer - tho this is extremely rare, or perhaps software that John isn't aware of running), but I'm supposed to consult a checkuser before granting. Thoughts? SQL ^{Query me!} 20:20, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm editing from home. I don't know of any privacy enhancements I am using.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:16, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't understand why you're suddenly on this hard blocked IP address. Both you and another person at the same time, actually. I've heard of meddling ISPs that screw around with their customers' IP traffic (forcing them to use dubious web services that "enhance" their experience), but this seems completely random. I don't see anything untoward, so I'd be OK with granting IPBE. I'd suggest considering a time-limited permission (such as a week or a month) to see if it clears up the problem. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:50, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  NinjaRobotPirate, Thank you very much. I will go ahead and grant for the middle ground, ~~2 weeks~~ 10 days (2 weeks isn't an option). SQL ^{Query me!} 22:10, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of William W. Parmley for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article William W. Parmley is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William W. Parmley until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:02, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Brent H. Nielson for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brent H. Nielson is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brent H. Nielson until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:08, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays!

Best wishes for this holiday season! Thank you for your Wiki contributions in 2018. May 2019 be prosperous and joyful. --K.e.coffman (talk) 00:42, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Noël ~ καλά Χριστούγεννα ~ З Калядамі ~ חנוכה שמח ~ Gott nytt år!

Nomination of John K. Edmunds for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John K. Edmunds is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John K. Edmunds (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:57, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of José A. Teixeira for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article José A. Teixeira is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/José A. Teixeira (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:06, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hans Henry Petersen for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hans Henry Petersen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hans Henry Petersen (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:20, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Valeri V. Cordón for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Valeri V. Cordón is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valeri V. Cordón (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:34, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Cheryl A. Esplin for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cheryl A. Esplin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cheryl A. Esplin (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:37, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deprodding of Vivian van Huiden

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Vivian van Huiden, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the file. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! There are a number of web entries on her, but I can't read Dutch so I believe Dutch speakers should have a chance to speak for or against her notability in a full Deletion discussion if it comes up again. LovelyLillith (talk) 18:41, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Michael F. Moody for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Michael F. Moody is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael F. Moody until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:06, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Benjamín De Hoyos for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Benjamín De Hoyos is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benjamín De Hoyos until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:29, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Joy F. Evans for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joy F. Evans is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joy F. Evans until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:26, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kate M. Barker for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kate M. Barker is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kate M. Barker until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:48, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Athos M. Amorím for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Athos M. Amorím is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Athos M. Amorím until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:39, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Carlie Christensen for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Carlie Christensen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlie Christensen until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:10, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep being even one of multiple judges in a YS dustrict court gives default notability. The attorney be they acting or appointed oversees a large b.c staff and is the face of the US govern mom ent for that district, in this case a state with over 3 million people. If this does not confer automatic notability, than how does playing gridiron footvall for 5 minutes in the second rate Arena Football league confer notability?John Pack Lambert (talk) 07:03, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of F. Michael Watson for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article F. Michael Watson is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/F. Michael Watson until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:15, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

source for information added to Elijah Abel?

Hi, I noticed that you added that Elijah Abel was ordained an elder "by Ambrose Palmer who was branch president in New Portage, Ohio where Abel was then residing." Did that information come from the Hawkins Report on Elijah Abel and his Priesthood? If it did, do you have a link to an online version of the article that we could include on that page? Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 17:08, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Salt Lake Tribune article describes Ambrose as a "presiding elder in Ohio" but they are now behind a paywall for me, and I am not paying them any money, I hate having to go to them at all as it is.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:35, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wish

Hello. Help improve, expand and copy edit for article Maureen Wroblewitz. Thanks you. Tauthanhhuyen34 (talk) 04:08, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I've blocked you for one week for violating your topic ban as demonstrated by your latest AFD nominations here. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 14:31, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I just have to say that I do not feel a total block of all edits that lasts an entire 7 days is in any way a reasonable response to what has actually occured.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:17, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Go to AN, where they are discussing this, when you are unblocked and appeal your ban there. 209.152.44.201 (talk) 04:23, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've unblocked you based on the discussion at WP:AN. Although there wasn't necessarily a consensus, it seemed enough thought that at least the length of the block was too long. Please try to be more careful in the future. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 22:34, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Coman Bricknell

I have moved Robert Coman Bricknell to draftspace, as the contents were unverifiable and at least partly wrong. I guess the name is wrong for starters, and should be Brickell, but worse, someone who lived from 1824 to 1900 can not have served in the legislature from 1833 to 1835. Please be more careful when creating articles. Fram (talk) 14:55, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Peter F. Meurs for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Peter F. Meurs is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter F. Meurs until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:03, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jack N. Gerard is notable

There is now an unjustified Notability tag on the article on Jack N. Gerard. With the block on editing in place that was defended by the editor who posted this tag, I have to for now seek other ways to make sure this unjustified action is not continued.

A paragraph should be added "Gerard as head of the API worked to increase outreach to ethnic minorities and hired people with connections to Democrats to move beyound a perception the interests of oil were only the interests of Republicans. He also replaced streamlined and narrowed the goals that API aimed at." with the reference for this portion being this [12] Fortune magazine article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:09, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the reference and text that reflects what the source says. Bakazaka (talk) 18:57, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:University of Florida College of Law alumni has been nominated for discussion

Category:University of Florida College of Law alumni, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Lagrange 613 10:00, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment List of churches in Sweden

Hello. You voted to delete this list in the Afd. I am trying to edit it, but it is massive. You raised some excellent points in your !vote. I would appreciate your thoughts of making this list better. Thanks Aurornisxui (talk) 17:44, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

English-language singers by nationality

As you created Category:English-language singers of Argentina and most of its siblings within Category:English-language singers, please note that they have been nominated for speedy renaming from "of" to "from". Please see WP:CFDS and comment there. – Fayenatic London 21:41, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

PROD

Hello. At WP:PROD, "an English Wikipedia policy" that "all editors should normally follow", you can read "provide a clear edit summary indicating the page has been proposed for deletion." So please do. And also "confirm the page is eligible for proposed deletion by checking that: it has not previously been proposed for deletion". This you have failed to do at Erin Dean. Thanks and regards, Biwom (talk) 01:15, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1949 establishments in Cameroon

A tag has been placed on Category:1949 establishments in Cameroon requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:15, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Non-existent categories

Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Aransas City, Texas, please make sure that the category page actually exists. In some cases, it may be appropriate to create a new category in accordance with Wikipedia's categorization guidelines, but it is usually better to use the most specific available existing category. It is never appropriate to leave a page categorised in a non-existent category, i.e. one whose link displays in red. You may find it helpful to use the gadget HotCat, which tests whether a category exists before saving a change. Thank you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:56, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What if there is a dead link that links to a search engine or something I'm not sure if it's a safe site?

So I was looking at the shortest bios, one page you have contributed to before (which is why I'm sending this) is María Julia Mantilla Mayer, now usually I put the dead link tag, but in this case the dead link sent me to a site that had a pop up box asking me something. Not even sure if the site was safe to begin with or if it is now. Should the link be deleted or what? Wgolf (talk) 01:11, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well thanks for that, I just had to remove another one (David Lach, this guy actually sounds notable though), as it sent me to a REALLY inappropriate name for a URL. Wgolf (talk) 01:30, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Then I have a case of this-I found a page that the bot removed the dead link tag for, but it still is a dead link Carlos Ramos (swimmer), considering it still gives a 404 error. (I readded the tag) On another note I did find a reliable source for one actress who had a IMDB only tag from last year. (There was one who did a few years back who I was very close to XFD until I clicked on the IMDB link to only find out she was a Emmy nominated screenwriter-something that was left out) Wgolf (talk) 02:16, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

the Derek DeGrate article

thanks john for contributing to my article! please let me know what it needs in order to be acceptable Kingtd1 (talk) 00:34, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Heidi Mendez for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Heidi Mendez is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heidi Mendez until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mccapra (talk) 20:55, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Cree-L Kofford for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cree-L Kofford is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cree-L Kofford (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:08, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Stephen W. Owen for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Stephen W. Owen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen W. Owen until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:35, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Monte J. Brough for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Monte J. Brough is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monte J. Brough until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:47, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A. N. Radhakrishnan

This article has now been developed. Just notifying. Thanks. 137.97.189.134 (talk) 09:48, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1861 establishments in Union Virginia has been nominated for discussion

Category:1861 establishments in Union Virginia, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:14, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Chicken Shack (Michigan)

The article Chicken Shack (Michigan) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Two-fold. Doesn't satisfy WP:NCORP, also, name is too generic for us to carry an article about a single company under this name.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. John from Idegon (talk) 23:39, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	A cup of my special rosehip infusion, picked and steeped in admiration for your patience, civility and diligence in the face of unrelenting animus. E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:51, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Bolivian beekeepers

A tag has been placed on Category:Bolivian beekeepers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. DannyS712 (talk) 01:05, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Brazilian beekeepers

A tag has been placed on Category:Brazilian beekeepers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. DannyS712 (talk) 01:05, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Irish beekeepers

A tag has been placed on Category:Irish beekeepers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. DannyS712 (talk) 01:06, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Syrian beekeepers

A tag has been placed on Category:Syrian beekeepers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. DannyS712 (talk) 01:07, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Egyptian beekeepers

A tag has been placed on Category:Egyptian beekeepers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. DannyS712 (talk) 01:08, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Indian beekeepers

A tag has been placed on Category:Indian beekeepers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. DannyS712 (talk) 01:11, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Expatriates in the Kingdom of Great Britain has been nominated for discussion

Category:Expatriates in the Kingdom of Great Britain, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 10:53, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ave Maria University has been nominated for discussion

Category:Ave Maria University, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. gnu 57 20:20, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:University of Modena faculty has been nominated for discussion

Category:University of Modena faculty, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 09:37, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jove(tribe) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Jove(tribe). Since you had some involvement with the Jove(tribe) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. — Smjg (talk) 17:30, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of D-bar-A Scout Ranch

Hello Johnpacklambert,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged D-bar-A Scout Ranch for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Red Phoenix ^talk 04:02, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Reyna I. Aburto for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Reyna I. Aburto is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reyna I. Aburto (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:03, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reconsideration

Hello, I hope you are having a good day, I'm new to Wikipedia and I started with a few articles that were up to deletion. I saw that you voted "Delete" for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bijan Zamani since then I edited and added new references (sources) and now interviews are not the sources and the creator removed the physician part that you were concerned about and as the points that you said is now taken care of can you reconsider your vote?

Kind regards Blake44 (talk) 00:50, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Year of establishment categories

Hi John. I noticed you added year of establishment categories to some football grounds articles (like Holiday Park (Durham)). Is "establishment" the right term to use for buildings or locations? It seems a bit awkward to me. We already have Category:Sports venues completed in 1923 (which itself is a subcategory of Category:Buildings and structures completed in 1923. Interested to know your thoughts. Cheers, Number 5 7 16:38, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

football grounds, stadiums etc have institutional functions so that it makes sense to say they were established.

I'm not so sure they do. They are structures or sites owned by organisations, so are not "established". Number 5 7 19:38, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please Reconsider

Hi Johnpacklambert, thank you for your comment on my article, you voted to delete on the article Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Felix_Chidi_Idiga i have made some changes, during my search on the subject i found out that he has received significant coverage from reliable sources according to WP:GNG. I am open to any suggestions to help improve the article, thank you. Jesusonogor (talk) 18:26, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Episcopalians from Louisiana

A tag has been placed on Category:Episcopalians from Louisiana requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:28, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1839 establishments in Prusia

A tag has been placed on Category:1839 establishments in Prusia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:16, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1977 establishments in Antigua and Barbuda

A tag has been placed on Category:1977 establishments in Antigua and Barbuda requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:23, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Elizabeth Fetzer Bates for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elizabeth Fetzer Bates is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elizabeth Fetzer Bates until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:09, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Octaviano Tenorio for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Octaviano Tenorio is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octaviano Tenorio (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:43, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Robert E. Wells for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert E. Wells is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert E. Wells until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:03, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Robert Coman Bricknell

Hello, Johnpacklambert. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Robert Coman Bricknell".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. UnitedStatesian (talk) 10:50, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1709 establishments in Africa

A tag has been placed on Category:1709 establishments in Africa requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:34, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Richard P. Nielsen (academic) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Richard P. Nielsen (academic) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard P. Nielsen (academic) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Collaboratio (talk) 06:11, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Paul K. Sybrowsky for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paul K. Sybrowsky is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul K. Sybrowsky until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Collaboratio (talk) 10:09, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Frustrated Wiki user

Frustrated Wiki user here. I have seen both articles Karen Jackman Ashton and Sahar Qumsiyeh deleted. Please help me understand better. Thanks. Fullrabb (talk) 19:35, 4 August 2019 (UTC)Fullrabb[reply]

I would say stop with identity politics. The fact of the matter is that the reasons for deleting the article on Ashton go much deeper. Being on a university board of any kind is not a sign of notability. I would have said the same about a member of the University of Utah board. Wikipedia is not a place to right wrongs and seeking to include articles on women for the sake of including articles on women is both misguided and unwise. Way more articles on Latter-day Saint men than on Latter-day Saint women have been deleted. A key is having clear claims to notability were not present in either of these cases. Attacking people based on their sex and using it as an argument to try to exclude them from participating in Wikipedia discussions is very unwise. As I said before Wikipedia is not the place to right great wrongs or even lesser wrongs.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:42, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for this reply John, it saves me reply to exactly the same message left on my talk page. User:Fullrabb You need to be very careful about accusing others of sexual bias even with veiled comments. I have only created 2 bios and both were for women. I do not know if User:E.M.Gregory is a man or not but if you look at their user page you will see this User:E.M.Gregory#Some_of_the_articles_I_have_created_on_notable_women_of_bygone_eras so I doubt they are against having articles on women on Wikipedia. I have noticed that you have created a ton of articles on LDS women. You have peppered these articles with information about the number of times their publications have been cited. This is not usual pratice and I presume it in reaction to the comment by User:David Eppstein on one of the deletion discussions. I took the time to check out some of the articles and notably the citations for Suzanne Fei and one of her publications of the 15 citations a good portion (5 or 6) are citations from papers written by her co-authors. As John you are a member of the LDS project I wonder if you would mind having a look at the articles as this seems to be a drive to include more articles about members of the church. Fullrabb, almost all of your article creations are linked to the church and I am afraid you may be stepping over the line into a conflict of interests area and are yours may be what wikipedia describes as a single purpose account and this drive to create articles connected to the church borders advocacy IMHO. I would prefer to allow John to look at this as I trust his judgement and as a member of the church himself he could not be accused of biais. --Dom from Paris (talk) 16:51, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate both your comments and apologize if I was frustrated a few days ago. I am still very green in the Wiki-world and am still learning the norms. I agree that I've done a fair number of LDS-related articles, but many of my articles are unrelated on business, art, and sports. If I was accusatory in any way I apologize, again. I look forward to any further advice or instruction you guys can send my way. Best. Fullrabb (talk) 17:07, 7 August 2019 (UTC)Fullrabb[reply]

Many thanks for the encouragement. Fullrabb (talk) 13:02, 9 August 2019 (UTC)Fullrabb[reply]

Sources for deaths

Hi. On edits like this, you need to provide a reliable source to show the subject is infact dead. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:37, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Please stop adding unsourced dates of death to biographical articles. Canadian Paul 20:27, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Taylor Barada deletion discussion

Hi, just want to say that the Wikipedia association football guidelines do state that players who have played in a fully professional match is notable. In England the top 4 divisions of the pyramid are fully professional. Furthermore the guy appears to be involved in some very notable companies. Seasider91 (talk) 21:58, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do not replace subcategories with parent categories

Do not replace Category:English emigrants to Canada and the like with Category:British emigrants to Canada and the like unless the subject was not English. Subcategories should never be replaced with parent categories. That is the clear basis upon which all categorization and sub-categorization is done on Wikipedia; please see WP:SUBCAT: Apart from certain exceptions (i.e. non-diffusing subcategories, see below), an article should be categorised as low down in the category hierarchy as possible, without duplication in parent categories above it. Please self-revert those changes you have made. Thank you. Softlavender (talk) 02:56, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

These categories are supposed to be by nationality. It is unclear why we even have the English emigrants categories for post 1707 people. They are clearly out of line with the way emigration categories should be.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:19, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- English is a nationality, just like Welsh, Scottish, and Northern Irish. Those are (some of) the constituent nationalities of "British". If you do not understand this, you should not be editing these categories at all. Please self-revert those changes you have made. If you do not, I will need to report you to an administrator. Do not persist in replacing subcategories with their parent categories. Softlavender (talk) 06:23, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Emigration is built around moving from one polity to another. Emigration admission in the receiving country does not care from which sub unit of the United Kingdom an immigrant us coming.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:26, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Are you going to fix your mis-categorization or not? If you have not done so within 24 hours, I will report you to administrators. Softlavender (talk) 06:29, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1789 establishments in Norway

A tag has been placed on Category:1789 establishments in Norway requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:18, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glenn Rawson (2nd nomination)

Since you were involved in the first time this article was deleted, I thought I'd bring it to your attention once again as the rationale is identical. Toddst1 (talk) 23:42, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Greg Olsen (artist)

The article Greg Olsen (artist) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Virtually unsourced vanity article. Far more promotional than informative.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. John from Idegon (talk) 17:53, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of SPLC sourced text at Michael Hart and your category deletion spree

Your dislike of the SPLC is not an encyclopedic reason for deletion of attributed text. You are also deleting categories in a rush - some that are clearly appropriate. I've mentioned this at the XFD and FTN. Doug Weller talk 09:47, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions for American politics

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 shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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 the 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. Bishonen | talk 10:24, 30 August 2019 (UTC).[reply]

Category:Irish emigrants to Australia (before 1923) has been nominated for discussion

Category:Irish emigrants to Australia (before 1923), which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ivar the Boneful (talk) 14:19, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Scientific racism category

Hey, I'm not sure if you missed my ping, but I opened up a discussion about removing the scientific racism categories here. Please comment there before making more removals. I think this might need to be classified as a non-diffusing category. Nblund^talk 23:06, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Irish immigrants (before 1923)

A tag has been placed on Category:Irish immigrants (before 1923) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:26, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Northern Irish emigrants to Australia

A tag has been placed on Category:Northern Irish emigrants to Australia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:41, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:British people of colonial Borneo

A tag has been placed on Category:British people of colonial Borneo requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:33, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Czechoslovak songwriters

A tag has been placed on Category:Czechoslovak songwriters requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:39, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:High school football coaches in the United States

Johnpacklambert, I see you've started to subdivide Category:High school football coaches in the United States by state. Category:High school football coaches in Alabama should be categorized in Category:Sportspeople in Alabama, not Category:People from Alabama, no? Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 15:41, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1505 establishments in the Spanish Empire

A tag has been placed on Category:1505 establishments in the Spanish Empire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:39, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1545 establishments in the Republic of Venice

A tag has been placed on Category:1545 establishments in the Republic of Venice requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:20, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Afghan expatriates in Lebannon

A tag has been placed on Category:Afghan expatriates in Lebannon requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 13:02, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1867 establishments in Serbia

A tag has been placed on Category:1867 establishments in Serbia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:46, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Guillermo Estrugo

The article Guillermo Estrugo has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication subject passes WP:GNG/WP:NBIO.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:10, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1805 establishments in Norway

A tag has been placed on Category:1805 establishments in Norway requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 17:04, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

China Meteorological Administration

Hi:

Why remove these 2 categories in this edition ?

Pierre cb (talk) 18:17, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Categories should not be placed in establishment categories unless they are also establishment categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:55, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People of the Austrian Empire has been nominated for discussion

Category:People of the Austrian Empire, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:26, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1771 establishments in India

A tag has been placed on Category:1771 establishments in India requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:25, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kartikeya Sharma restored

As a courtesy, this is to notify you that an article you successfully ivoted for deletion, Kartikeya Sharma, has been restored to mainspace with new information and sources. You may wish to examine the new version to see if you have any remaining concerns regarding notability. SilkTork (talk) 11:02, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1964 establishments in New Guinea

A tag has been placed on Category:1964 establishments in New Guinea requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:03, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Karen Black, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Czech (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) 08:53, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar for you

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you for your efforts on Wikipedia, you are a defender of Wikipedia! Celestina007 (talk) 17:56, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Ottoman expatriates in the Austrian Empire

A tag has been placed on Category:Ottoman expatriates in the Austrian Empire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:13, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removing categories at Chris Evans (actor)

Hi there, on this edit, any particular reason you removed 4 categories that applied to him? LADY LOTUS • TALK 19:15, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

~~~ Merry Christmas! ~~~
Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!
圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스!
สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส! ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành!

Hello, Johnpacklambert! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:11, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Happy Holidays

Sweet Brown Snail by Jason Rhoades and Paul McCarthy

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Thank you for all your edits and contributions this year.
Wishing you a happy holiday!
ThatMontrealIP (talk)

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Nomination of Janette Broman for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Janette Broman is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Janette Broman until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 21:08, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck

豊かな十年へようこそ/WELCOME TO THE D20s

Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune.
このミラ PはJohnpacklambertたちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます！
フレフレ、みんなの未来！/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE!
ミラ P 02:34, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Brigham Young, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Samuel H. Smith (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to only remove article that never in the article mention this. Others I am removing because the article is already in a sub-category. John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:45, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you deleting valid categories?

Why are you deleting so many valid categories from articles such as American people of Irish descent and American people of Polish descent? You are not including edit summaries to justify actions which at face value look like vandalism. — O'Dea (talk) 00:29, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Rogers (California politician)

Hi, would you reconsider your argument in favor or against keeping this one as there are now 18 sources?Ndołkah☆ (talk) 05:56, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Deletion

Hi, I see that you took part in a discussion of the proposed deletion for an article on Frederick Goold in August 2018, and the result at the time was "no consensus". I am just letting you know that I have renominated this article for deletion here.[13]. I am contacting all contributors to that discussion to see if you wish to comment again. In my view, the additional sources provided at the time did nothing to establish notability as definied by WP. I have also proposed two others for deletion for the same reason here [14] and here [15]. Thanks -- Sirfurboy (talk) 11:32, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notability in priesthood

Greetings, Johnpacklambert. In this AfD discussion you stated that for our 19th century archdeacon to be notable enough to merit a Wikipedia entry we needed the subject to have "ma[d]e the main edition of Boase." Please note that such a mention on its own does not confer Wikinotability for a person. Per WP:RELPEOPLE, only bishops and above merit inclusion in Wikipedia, if, of cpurse, sources verify their existence. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 17:37, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback for an article

I made important adjustments to the article please give it another look and tell me if you have any feedback Thank you https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Aldi_Brothers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hidar.ayube (talk • contribs) 14:13, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Picahantas is 200 years closer to the present than Edward III. Anyway in 1965 Virginia law was written in a way that descent from Pocahantas could be ignored in racial classification. John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:26, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Fanning family's descent from Edward III

Hello, Johnpacklambert...

I noticed that you deleted the reference to Elle Fanning's royal ancestry. I was wondering why you did so. It was well sourced (unless of course you have a problem with Ancestry.com, in which case other sources can be provided) and it had precedents here on Wikipedia (with Jane Fonda and Guy Ritchie being notable examples of Hollywood figures whose pages refer to their own royal ancestries).

I'll wait twenty-four hours to give you the opportunity to respond. If there are no objections, I'll then restore the reference.

Best wishes,

O.ominirabluejack (talk) 13:01, 3 January 2020 (UTC)O.ominirabluejack.[reply]

We should not be posting ancestry back 600 years that has no relevance to a person's career and life. It is trivial detail that is not defining to the individual at all.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:08, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Then am I to understand that you take issue with all of the examples of us doing that previously on Wikipedia (including in the cases of the two entertainers that I cited here) or do you have a problem with the Fanning case specifically? Also, assuming that it's of no consequence is presumptuous in my opinion. Try telling a member of the family of Edith Bolling that being descended from Pocahontas is irrelevant, and see what kind of response you get.

O.ominirabluejack (talk) 03:14, 4 January 2020 (UTC)O.ominirabluejack.[reply]

Deprodding of Jake Byrne

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Jake Byrne, which you proposed for deletion. played in eight NFL games per NFL.com bio in infobox. 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! Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:48, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deprodding of Kain Colter

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Kain Colter, which you proposed for deletion. He likely passes WP:GNG, as he was a starting quarterback for a Power Five college football team. 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! Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:53, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deprodding of Joe Don Duncan

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Joe Don Duncan, which you proposed for deletion. The article was previously discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Don Duncan and closed as "keep" so it is ineligible for PROD. 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! Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:22, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Johnpacklambert

Thank you for creating Adam M. Duncan.

User:Animalparty, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

I know this article was created years ago, but this advice also applies to your more recent creations. such as Vincent J. Piro: please strive to ensure citations are precise and complete to ensure verifiability, don't use vague or invented names like "Desert News Obituary". Website URLs may change at any time, rendering links dead, but complete bibliographic citations allow anyone to identify and locate the source, even if they are reading a paper copy of the article. See WP:CITEHOW for basic information. You can use templates like {{Cite web}} {{cite news}} or {{cite journal}}, as well as advanced tools like refToolbar and VisualEditor to automatically generate more complete citations. Let me know if you have any questions. Cheers!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Animalparty}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

--Animalparty! (talk) 02:21, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Norman Kamosi

Hello, Johnpacklambert,

Thank you for creating Norman Kamosi.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

This has been tagged for 2 issues.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Boleyn}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 08:23, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deprodding of Choe Hyeong-min

==Deprodding of Choe Hyeong-min==

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Choe Hyeong-min, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. 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! LegofanCy (talk) 12:32, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on Tolkien fiction coverage

Right now we are in the midst of right sizing our coverage of Tolkien's fictional works. We have way too much coverage. We also as a consequence on occasion rely to much on links to other articles in the articles we have, in some cases links to articles that do not exist.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:51, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:American emigrants to Saudi Arabia

A tag has been placed on Category:American emigrants to Saudi Arabia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:22, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Cuban expatriates in the United Kingdom

A tag has been placed on Category:Cuban expatriates in the United Kingdom requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:23, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Elwing on List of Middle-earth characters

Hello! I saw you added an entry on Elwing to List of Middle-earth characters. I'm not sure this item belongs on the list -- at present (see discussion) -- this list is for notable Middle-earth characters. Is there evidence Elwing is notable? Best, BenKuykendall (talk) 20:06, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Beauty pageant winners

I notice that you are AfD-ing and PROD-ing multiple articles about women who have won first place in notable beauty pageants -- among others, a Miss New York and a Miss British Virgin Islands. This seems wrong, considering that WP:ANYBIO specifies people are notable if they have "received a well-known and significant award or honor." State and national titles such as these are not random beauty pageants, they are extremely well-known awards, and significant to many people although probably not to you personally. HouseOfChange (talk) 17:06, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notable is far too low a bar to make something convey notability to its winner. There are thousands of awards that pass our guidelines for multiple but winning them does not make the recipient notable. This is especially true of beauty pagents that happen every year. It might be a different issue is say the 2012 Miss New York pageant was notable by itself, but it is not.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:32, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please link to some previous consensus supporting your opinion that beauty pageants are somehow an exception to the WP policy ANYBIO criterion "winning a well-known and significant honor." HouseOfChange (talk) 19:38, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The opening discussion here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Beauty_Pageants/Archive_7 shows a widespread view that winning a state level beauty pagent even one that is a feeder to Miss America, or winning at least some national level feeder events for Miss Universe, are not considered to be significant honors. Significant honors are awards like the Nobel Prize that recognize a large body of work over time, they are not beauty contest awards.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:09, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, and I am seeking wider consensus at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy). HouseOfChange (talk) 20:33, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Middle-earth articles

I made a statement in a recent AfD that I thought we'd got most of the cruft articles rid of. However, after looking through Category:Middle-earth, I'm realizing that was very far from correct. I'm still not 100% for sure where to draw the line, and since you've been active in the AfDs, I'd like your opinion on some of this. It looks like articles like Thingol and White Mountains (Middle-earth) should probably go, but what about Mithril? That article is very poorly sourced, and honestly, mithril doesn't play any real role in Tolkien's works besides the dwarves looking for it and finding a Balrog instead, and the mail shirt Bilbo gets from Thorin and gives to Frodo. Where do you think the line should be drawn? Hog Farm (talk) 02:11, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

After realizing Mithril was only retroactively included in the Hobbit by Tolkien, I have my doubts that it is really notable enough to merit an article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:46, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hasen at Illinois Institute of Technology faculty?

You recently added several categories to the Richard L. Hasen page. Did you mean to include the Category:Illinois Institute of Technology faculty? As far as I am aware, he is not a member of that faculty. JoelWhy?(talk) 21:50, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hasen taught at Chicago-Kent College of Law which is a part of the Illinois Institute of Technology.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:51, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Ahh, gotcha. Thanks! JoelWhy?(talk) 21:56, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Allen Jenkins

Why did you remove Category:American people of Irish descent? He was a member of the so-called Hollywood "Irish Mafia". Clarityfiend (talk) 09:35, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Stern School of Business alumni has been nominated for discussion

Category:Stern School of Business alumni, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Alansohn (talk) 13:26, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Ethnic Armenian Christians

A tag has been placed on Category:Ethnic Armenian Christians requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:05, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Benjamin Gold (politician) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Benjamin Gold (politician) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benjamin Gold (politician) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Morbidthoughts (talk) 08:14, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1501 establishments in the Ottoman Empire

A tag has been placed on Category:1501 establishments in the Ottoman Empire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:45, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1706 establishments in Wales

A tag has been placed on Category:1706 establishments in Wales requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:04, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Ethnic Armenian educators

A tag has been placed on Category:Ethnic Armenian educators requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:37, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Ethnic Armenian feminists

A tag has been placed on Category:Ethnic Armenian feminists requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:54, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited William W. Cluff, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Edward Hunter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:01, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:British people of colonial Jamaica

A tag has been placed on Category:British people of colonial Jamaica requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:23, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Continued abuse

it shocks me that events of 7 years ago, when people engaged in unjustified abuse attacks on me, are still brought up and laughed about on this project. No one has ever apologized for their false, malacious and unjustified character assasinations against me. The abuse people get on Wikipedia for trying to improve it is unconscioable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:53, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attack

My apologies for going too far with the personal attacks on several AfDs. I've struck the ones I could find, and if there's any I missed in active AfDs, let me know and I'll strike them too. Smartyllama (talk) 15:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Prod

Hi. Please read WP:PRODNOM and WP:CONTESTED, before prod'ing any further articles, esp these bits:

"Provide a clear edit summary indicating the page has been proposed for deletion."
"If anyone, including the creator, removes a proposed deletion tag from a page, do not replace it"

Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:19, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Do you understand the difference between lack of sources and lack of notabilty? Your prod of Scott William Winters said "The sources here are not enough to pass the general notability guidelines". Can you be specfic in stating which notability guides this article would fail? Or explain why someone with 50+ acting credits, including a lead role in a long-running TV show would be non-notable? Or to put it another way, how do you think that article would fare if you were to AfD it based on that rationle? Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:31, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User page

Hello! I Noticed and reverted another user's changes to your user page.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 20:22, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Johnpacklambert. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Mass removal of categories

Hey, could you stop removing descent categories from articles at such a high volume and with no discussion? Thanks, p b p 20:05, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am removing descent categories that have no evidence in the article. Articles should not be placed in categories for which there is no sourcing for them in the article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:26, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1753 establishments in the Holy Roman Empire

A tag has been placed on Category:1753 establishments in the Holy Roman Empire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:01, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

John Powers (mayor)

I deprodded this because arguably he's notable, as mayor of a regionally important city (site of a world's fair). You know WP:AfD. Bearian (talk) 02:38, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:British emigrants to the Kingdom of Hawaii

A tag has been placed on Category:British emigrants to the Kingdom of Hawaii requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:03, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deprod

Hi, I have deprodded Dan Sullivan (American football) as there is a source in the infobox and the player clearly passes WP:NGRIDIRON. Eagles 24/7 (C) 13:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mae West

You recently deleted the following categories from the Mae West article: American people of English descent, American people of Irish descent, and American people of Scottish descent. I was wondering why, since Miss West's ancestry looks to be supported by cited refs. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 18:17, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I overlooked some of that. I still think we have let way too many minor very back cases of ancestry be included in articles. It is annoying how many get included with no mention in an article at all.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:19, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed (& thanks for your reply). And then there's all the edit-warring about controversial ancestry/citizenship cases like "Peter O'Toole"...((shudder)). Carry on & cheers - Shearonink (talk) 18:28, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deaths in 2020

Please stop removing the redlinks from the page. Redlinks are given a month until removal. Rusted AutoParts 15:41, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Simon Cooke wikipedia article

"The journalism credits include running fanzines, winning a competition and writing web articles - these are not notable in themselves, nor are widely cited"

You forgot Your Sinclair magazine, Internet & Comms Today magazine, Internet Today magazine, How to Get Online and Arcane magazine, which are all print magazines, but thanks for that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.16.209.4 (talk) 05:48, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re; Tessier deletion

Re: Tessier deletion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Edward_Tessier You write: Does not meet notability. Without a dobut, that is not true. Please remove article for deletion tag on Tessier. Press cites include LA TIMES San Gabriel edition COVERY STORY: "Downtown Visionary": https://www.latimes.com › archives › la-xpm-1995-01-26-ga-24587-story https://www.latimes.com › archives › la-xpm-1995-02-05-me-28374-story https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1989-10-29-we-73-story.html https://www.claremont-courier.com › articles › news › t28977-cap https://www.dailybulletin.com/2017/09/23/settlement-agreement-will-lead-to-public-improvements-benefiting-pomonas-disabled-residents/ https://www.dailybulletin.com/2018/08/05/downtown-pomona-business-owners-denounce-initiative-that-could-allow-marijuana-shops-in-the-historic-core/ www.claremont-courier.com › articles › news › t25139-house https://www.dailybulletin.com/2020/02/16/vacant-since-1990s-pomona-building-shows-stubborn-problem/ https://www.dailybulletin.com/2019/04/30/heres-how-claremont-might-re-develop-the-area-south-of-the-village/ https://www.dailybulletin.com/2019/08/09/25-years-ago-pomona-turned-to-the-arts-to-save-downtown/ http://www.insidesocal.com/davidallen/2019/08/16/column-ghost-town-pomonas-arts-colony/ https://www.dailybulletin.com/2018/07/19/a-vote-of-confidence-in-downtown-pomona-as-business-district-is-renewed/ https://www.dailybulletin.com/2019/10/10/street-vending-will-soon-be-legal-in-pomona-a-year-after-the-city-banned-such-sales/ Tessier is a public success in his locality over decades and is duly noted and quoted in local press because of it. Tessier has served or now serves as a Board Trustee for Western University of Health Sciences (the largest employer in Pomona), president of Pomona’s Central Business District Association, Chair of the City of Pomona Planning Commission, and is a member of the Pomona Leadership Forum, the LA County Fair Directors Association, the Pomona Community Foundation, and is the founding and current president of the School of Arts and Enterprise in Pomona. Clearly, Tessier is a major presence who according to the cites has rehabilitated an entire district of a major Los Angeles County city as a "visionary" and as recently as several months ago was still being quoted and cited in local and regional press. The comment that cites were hard to find is not supported by the facts of a even a cursory search engine dive. Please remove the article for deletion tag. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.126.86.8 (talk) 13:33, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Thanks for the help with Luis Miguel Romero Fernández…

"Fight the Good Fight Every Moment"

Roberto221 (talk) 21:18, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Geeorge F. Sutherland" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Geeorge F. Sutherland. Since you had some involvement with the Geeorge F. Sutherland redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Regards, SONIC678 04:49, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need your help, some clowns vandalised and raped the Christopher Layne page on some drivel about the article being "linkfarm", thanks

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Layne 112.199.181.130 (talk) 13:17, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American trade unionists of German descent

I've recreated Category:American trade unionists of German descent before noticing that you had nominated for deletion in December. I wish I had been notified of that discussion because, as I posted on the talk page of the category. German-American trade unionism is indeed a worthy topic on Wikipedia. Entire unions like the Brewery Workers operated in German for decades. The German manner of organizing was entirely different than the English craft unionism that predominated the American Federation of Labor. Please see the category's talk page for links to some of the books and journal articles that have been published on the topic.--User:Namiba 15:55, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Prod (again)

Hi. Apologies for being blunt, but do you understand the difference between having little or no sourcing and an article being non-notable? Looking at the prods you've made on Anne Canovas, Eric Server and Billy Sands (to pick just three examples in the past 24hrs) suggests you do not. Do you believe all three of these would end in delete at AfD? What WP:BEFORE work have you done before prodding them? All the recent articles I've come across in the past 24hrs are similar - actors with a long filmography (50+ films/TV shows or more in most cases), but with only IMDB as a source. This does not equate to being non-notable.

You didn't respond to my earlier thread from last month about your prodding, but I ask you take these points onboard. However, if this continues, then WP:ANI would be an avenue to solve this issue. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:04, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IMDb is not a reliable source. We should not have articles with no reliable sources. Prod delete is exactly the type of notification these articles need. If you can produce additional sources you are fully free to do so. Prod delete is meant to be used on atricles with no reliable sources. It is against Wikipedia policy for articles with no reliable sources, especially biographies of living people to exist.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:01, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) A quick google on Anna Canovas finds the reliable BFI filmography here: I'll add it. PamD 18:15, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi John - thanks for your reply. The opening line at WP:PROD states: "Proposed deletion (PROD) is a way to suggest an article or file for uncontroversial deletion". A bit further down, at WP:PRODNOM, point one asks "Is there a valid reason for deletion?", which links to WP:DEL-REASON. Point 8 of that states "Articles whose subjects fail to meet the relevant notability guideline (WP:N, WP:GNG, WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, WP:CORP, and so forth)" So are you saying that an unsourced article would automatically fail the relevant notability guideline? Most of those actors would probably pass point one of WP:NACTOR, for example. Picking someone at random, inspired by the films on in the UK over the Easter break, would you say Mike Henry (American football), from Smokey and the Bandit fame, should be prodded?

There are definitely non-notable articles on WP, and I know you've done great work in expunging them, but sometimes the prods you add are not valid in all cases. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:38, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Let's work on a project together

Hi JPL. I have created over 350 articles. As I am far from perfect and tend towards inclusionism, a few have been deleted. Several more have been nominated for deletion and then it was decided to keep them. I am much more interested in creating content that deleting it, so I don't spend any time at AfD unless specifically summoned.

I've noticed on the few occasions we have interacted there that your tone can come across as unnecessarily hostile. Saying that I [the project and am burdensome] is some pretty strong language that I don't think really advances the conversation in any way. It certainly isn't civil. I also note that you are a prolific article creator. Thank you very much for that. However, I see that nearly 10% of the articles you have created have been deleted, a rate more than twice mine. Perhaps it is not your intent to come across so strongly, but you do. And, given that a greater percentage of my articles are kept compared to yours, perhaps it is a bit unfair for you to say that I am a burden.

All I'm asking for is a little civility and the assumption of good faith. If you are willing, I would like to collaborate on creating a new article of mutual interest. I've been making an effort lately to turn women blue. If you can think of a woman who is deserving of an article, I'd love to hear it. Thanks. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 02:54, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 23:46, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is a little less presentist

Well, that might be overstating things. The year with the most articles categorized as births in that year moved backwards from 1989 to 1988. However we are looking at 16,674 articles in 1988 to 16,670 in 1989. We also have lots of living people articles with no mention of the birth year. Lastly, we can have very presentist articles on people who are much older than 32 so the exact top birth year tells us little, but it is still discouragingly useless. We also are now over 951,000 articles on living people, the march towards 1 million is moving forward.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:13, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Joseph Brickey for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joseph Brickey is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Brickey until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Theredproject (talk) 15:38, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive silent film and actress redlink removal

I see you are on a kick of examining, removing redlinks, and nominating for deletion articles on silent films and silent film actresses. You appear to be performing no contemporary media research before nominating, removing the redlinks, and performing bold, uninformed edits like your recent edit on Lillian Knight. To quote the guideline: Do not remove red links unless you are certain that Wikipedia should not have an article on the subject, or if the red link could be replaced with a link to an article section where the subject is covered as part of a broader topic. I also see someone has left a message about your tendency to remove redlinks before. Please stop removing the redlinks. It is disruptive to groups like Women in Red in particular, as they track articles needed by number of redlinks, and it also creates more work for editors of other WikiProjects who will write the articles. --DiamondRemley39 (talk) 14:30, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was determined that the links on Lillian Knight to the films in question were wrong. You have underestimated how many actor and actress links from films go to false positives. Excessive red links are an invitation to the creation of false links.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:37, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

At the time you made that edit, no such thing had been determined. I had established that she was an actress in western films in the early silent film days; indeed, she may be the same person as those early credits, as further research may tell... you removed the earliest credits and left the ones from 1925. Saying that she was active in film at that time rather than earlier was a bad guess... and you didn't even have to guess, but you guessed the opposite of what research and discussion, including an open link in the article, had suggested. The films I had listed in the text of the article were from 1912, which is before 1925. In short: please leave these types of edits for the people with the resources in front of them. Regarding redlinks, are you are saying you do it your way and remove them because your way is better than Wikipedia's guideline to leave them in? How do you determine what is "excessive" in a cast or film list? How do you know what has weight and what has not enough? DiamondRemley39 (talk) 15:32, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The earliest discussion in the deletion nomination was suggesting that we were talking about the person who was a beauty queen in 1924 and acted in films later in the 1920s. What I do know is there are lots of false links in cast lists, and leaving lots of red links makes this more likely to happen. If you have a list of a person's appearances it is easy to go through and confirm that the listings on those casts lists are all linked.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:34, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The House of Bondage is an example of restrained inclusion of links, that should be in my mind the standard for how these cast lists are treated. I in no way created this state of affairs, so I am not alone in opposing massive number of red links.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:41, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussions

You are free to comment on deletion discussions here.
Vmavanti (talk) 23:16, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adeyemi I Alowolodu

The "source" you cited here does not support most of the text you added: it has his title and regnal dates, nothing more. You are an experienced enough editor to know that you need to add references, not just stuff that you "know". I nearly changed this to a redirect to List of rulers of the Yoruba state of Oyo, as the only sourced information is already included in that list ... except that the list is unsourced too.

Please provide the sources which support your statements in the article. Thanks. PamD 11:11, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bekere Godana

Another problematic stub: you know that inline references are needed, not just "Sources". You don't seem to have looked at your work enough to realise that you had muddled the formatting of the second source so that it has a URL but is not clickable. Please take the time to make well-formed stubs. Thanks. PamD 11:17, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:British people of colonial Ceylon

A tag has been placed on Category:British people of colonial Ceylon requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:14, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Page moves

Roman Catholic Diocese of Peterborough (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Roman Catholic Diocese of Hamilton, Ontario (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

You did not have consensus for those page moves and they were disruptive. You did not even discuss them. Have you no sense of consistency with the thousands of other diocesan articles that follow the template "Roman Catholic Diocese of ..."? Elizium23 (talk) 17:45, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:British emigrants to Portugal

A tag has been placed on Category:British emigrants to Portugal requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:06, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Nasa, Ghana for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nasa, Ghana is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nasa, Ghana until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 10:39, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American women writers of Japanese descent has been nominated for merging

Category:American women writers of Japanese descent has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:Namiba 14:09, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion on recreating an article based off an old AfD (using new sources)?

Hi there, I see you on AfD a lot. You commented a year ago on this AfD here regarding an article I created when I was a newbie: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Susan_Kuhnhausen. I have learned a lot about Wikipedia (and notability) since that AfD. I have recently found some new sources for this subject as an event (and not a person) (most importantly episodes of TV shows) and I think it might be appropriate to rebuild the article as I have described at User_talk:Sandstein#Revisiting_an_old_AfD_with_some_new_sources_for_notability. I was wondering, if you have time, if you could review what I have commented on Sandstein's talk page and let me know your opinion on whether or not it would be worth the time to rebuild the article with the sources I have listed there. Thank you for any advice, Ikjbagl (talk) 01:37, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1985 establishments in the Vatican City has been nominated for deletion

Category:1985 establishments in the Vatican City has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Morbidthoughts (talk) 18:51, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Roberto Vidal

The article Roberto Vidal has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not seeing any indication of independent notability that would meet WP:GNG. Sources provided are church publications, which I don't consider independent. Even if they were, it would still fail the part of WP:N that requires worldwide notice by general-audience publications.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:02, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1985 establishments in Western Samoa

A tag has been placed on Category:1985 establishments in Western Samoa requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:49, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1622 establishments in Wales

A tag has been placed on Category:1622 establishments in Wales requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:54, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

unsourced info?

Hi, I noticed you reverted my removal of the unsourced information you added to James E. Talmage. Why did you do this? Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 16:41, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I added sources for all the information I added.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Grandique Point Lighthouse

The first Grandique Point Light, a pole light, was established at Grand Dique Beach in 1884. So the Wikipedia entry was in the Category:Lighthouses completed in 1884 The present lighthouse at Grandique Point was under construction starting in 1906, and the new light was ready for the opening of navigation in 1907. So the Wikipedia entry was also in the Category:Lighthouses completed in 1906 (which probably should have been 1907 as that is when it went into operation). Can it not be in both categories? I see you seem to suggest it cannot as you removed it from Category:Lighthouses completed in 1906. Ken Heaton (talk)

Nomination of Roberto Vidal for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Roberto Vidal is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roberto Vidal until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:33, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Naples Eastern University faculty

A tag has been placed on Category:Naples Eastern University faculty requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:45, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1726 establishments in Norway

A tag has been placed on Category:1726 establishments in Norway requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:54, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of state leaders in 1768, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ahom (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:34, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker 1

As of right now, 4:24PM May 28, 2020 my time, there are 957,490 articles in the living people category of Wikipedia. We will probably hit 1 million such articles before the end of the year.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:25, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker 2

As of right now, 8:39PM May 29, 2020 my time, there are 957,470 articles in the category living people of the English Wikipedia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:39, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker 3

As of June 1, 2020 at 11:19 AM Eastern US time there were 957,747 articles in the living people category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:18, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we will not reach 1 million BLP this year

If I did the math right the BLP category has been only growing at less than 138 per day over the last two days. By my calculations to reach 1 million by the end of the year it needs to be growing at 198 a day. We may avoid hitting 1 million, although maybe I am too optimistic.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:23, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

As of 12:42 PM eastern US time on June 2, 2020 there are 957,909 articles on living people. This represents a growth of 162 BLPs in just over a day.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:42, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1707 establishments in Norway

A tag has been placed on Category:1707 establishments in Norway requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:20, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

As of June 3, 2020 at 2:12 PM there were 958,127 biogrpahies of living people. This represents a growth of 218 articles in just over 24 hours. if this rate continues we will exceed 1 million biographies of living people by the end of the year.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:12, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

On June 4, 2020 at 1:57 PM eastern time there was 958,250 biograhies of living people on the English Wikipedia. This represents a growth of 123 in just under 24 hours.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:57, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker again

On June 7, 2020 at 11:05 AM Eastern Statndard Time there were 958,733 articles on living people. This represents a growth of 487 articles in just under 3 days. This averages to an increase of 162 articles on living people a day.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:08, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion analysis

Currently 85.4% of biographical deletion discussions are on articles on living people. My guess is that this is much lower than is normally the case. 31.4% of articles on living people do not have a birth year.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:43, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ava Bahram

Hello, I have re-read your comments, 3 of Ava Bahram's songs with the letters "Roozhaye Tanhaei", "Agooshe To" and "Gol ya Pooch" have been broadcasted in the Gem TV channels in the 3 years and got a megahit. please Attention considering that by Islamic laws it is forbidden for female singers to broadcast their voices on the national television of the Islamic Republic of Iran , and in this regard their songs have been broadcasted on Gem TV channels and others Persian-language satellite TV channels, such as PMC, Radio Javan, and others. so there are good reasons. I researched this in the case of other Iranian female singer who also have an article. Please check and help me in this regard so that I can keep the article on the home page. Thank you & I also hate cigarettes Zabihsohrabi (talk) 00:22, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

As of 11:50 AM Eastern Standard Time there are 959,021 biographies of living people in Wikipedia. This is a growth of 288 in 2 days, or a growth rate of 144 a day.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:50, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A set back for presentism?

The birth year category we used to have the most entries in was 1989. It is now 1988. Presentism in theory would have this contantly moving forward, however there are other factors, so this is hardly a good sign against presentism. The numbers are 16761 versus 16771 so not really a signiificant difference either. We also have so many artiles on living people that lack a birth year it is hard to assume too much about these figures.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:03, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

we have 137,000 articles in the year of birth missing (living people) category, and there are almost certainly other articles that fit the criteria of that category but are not there.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:04, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
we have 137,000 articles in the year of birth missing (living people) category, and there are almost other articles that fit the parameters but have not been soccategorized yet.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:05, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Juan A. Uceda for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Juan A. Uceda is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Juan A. Uceda until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:26, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

As of 4:15 PM EAstern Standard US time on June 12, 2020 there are 959,550 articles in the BLP category. This is a growht of 429 articles in just over 3 days. This is about 143 net increase of articles on living people a day.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:16, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- The net gain is not high enough for us to reach 1 million articles in the biographies of living people category by the end of the day. I do fear things like the US elections will cause the creation of many more articles on living people and so I suspect right now we are seeing a lower rate of new articles per day than we may in November. We will see.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:18, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Vietnamese emigrants to Taiwan

A tag has been placed on Category:Vietnamese emigrants to Taiwan requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:03, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2014 establishments in Tajikistan

A tag has been placed on Category:2014 establishments in Tajikistan requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 13:58, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

As of 10:45 AM on June 16, 2020 there were 960,236 biographies of living people on Wikipedia. The BLP category will have to grow at a rate of 201 people a day on average in net to reach 1 million biographies of living people by the end of the year. I am now confident this will not happen. 1988 and 1989 were earlier today tied for being the two largest birth year categories. Wikipedia still has major issues with presentism, however since it has since at least 2006 had a year in the 1980s as the one which was the largest birth year, it is becoming a little less presentist. Although not much. We have shifted from the most heavy number of articles being about 20 year olds to being about 30 year olds. However this is not a sign we are getting better coverage of people notable for past events, but that new notabilities older in life accued with earlier ones keep some ages more numerous.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:50, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New BLP tracker

On June 18, 2020 at 1:06 PM Eastern Standard Time in the US there were 960,526 articles in the biographies of living people category. This represents a growth of 290 articles in just over two days. This is a growth of about 145 articles a day. Far below the 201 net growth in the category for it to reach 1 million by the end of the year. I now suspect we will aboid reaching that point.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:08, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

As of 3:10 PM on June 22, 2020 in Eastern Dailight US time the number of biographies of living people in Wikipedia was 961,291. This represents a growth of 765 articles in just over 4 days. This represents a net growth of 191 articles a day. This is below the needed growth rate to reach 1 million articles by the end of the year, but very close to it.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:14, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article Of Şanışer

Hi, I am consulting you because you are an experienced user. I have created this page Draft:Şanışer and this page has been declined. But I translated from turkish wikipedia (also there is a version of german) can you browse that page? And if it is possible approve. Baran Ahmet (talk) 17:42, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP Tracker=

As of 3:10 PM on June 23, 2020 Eastern Daylight Time there are 561,523 articles in the biographies of living people category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:14, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- This represents a net growth of 231 articles in about a day. At this rate we will reach more than 1 million biographies of living people by the end of the year. I am not sure if such an outcome is avoidable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:16, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dead template

Hiya, noticed on your user page you have a couple of dead templates. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:29, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

As of 4:18 PM Eastern Daylight time in the US on June 25, 2020 there were 961,838 articles in the biographies of living people category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:18, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- This was a growth of 315 articles in just over 2 days, for a growth of 157.5 articles per day. This level will keep us from hitting the dreaded 1 million biographies of living people by the end of the year.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:20, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

At 9:35 AM on June 28, 2020 the biographies of living people category had 962,551 articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:38, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deprodding of Jackelin Arias

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Jackelin Arias, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, proposed deletion is disallowed on articles that have previously been de-prodded, even by the page's creator, or which have previously been listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{proposed deletion}} template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! —KuyaBriBri^Talk 22:19, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Retzbach

I've listed 4 non-fiction books demanded as recommanded. Is it now ok? Can you change your decision, opinion, ...not to delete please?! Can I ask you to get my mentor? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Roman_Retzbach --YvesMe (talk) 10:28, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:American emigrants to Iraq

A tag has been placed on Category:American emigrants to Iraq requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:32, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deprodding of Ummarapas Vathanakul

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Ummarapas Vathanakul, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, proposed deletion is disallowed on articles that have previously been de-prodded, even by the page's creator, or which have previously been listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{proposed deletion}} template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! —KuyaBriBri^Talk 13:49, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1597 establishments in the Holy Roman Empire

A tag has been placed on Category:1597 establishments in the Holy Roman Empire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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.

This message was automatically delivered by QEDKbot. 14:12, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please

Hi, John Pack Lambert , I saw your contribution in the proposed deletion of the article Camilo Prieto Valderrama. I have removed the references that were excessive or not necessary. He is an important environmental activist in Colombia, has published several books, is a popular television personality and has several awards. I think it is relevant enough (but that was not the problem in deleting the article); if you can please help in a positive way, I appreciate it. --3erres (talk) 17:43, 5 July 2020 (UTC)--3erres (talk) 17:43, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker=

There are as of 3:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time 963,553 articles in the biographies of living people category of Wikipedia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:18, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This represents a net growth on average of 125.25 articles a day in the category. To reach 1 million articles by the end of the year the category would have to grow on average at a net rate of 204 a day. There are some events in the rest of the year that might well cause the creation of several new articles, including the US elections in November, so it is still not incoceivable we will reach 1 million articles by the end of the year. But it does seem less likely.
For those really intestested if the growth in the bios of living people over the last 8 days continues, than there will be less than 986,000 biographies of living people at the end of 2020.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:50, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1625 establishments in France

A tag has been placed on Category:1625 establishments in France requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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.

This message was automatically delivered by QEDKbot. 14:13, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Denise_Posse-Blanco_Lindberg

She passes User:Bearian/Standards#Notability_of_attorneys: Inns of Court, law review editor, notable cases. Bearian (talk) 21:59, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- I have never thought about the lawyer pass. Good to know.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:00, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion for City of Swan Hill

An article that you have been involved in editing—City of Swan Hill—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Jonathan O'Donnell (talk) 23:53, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Gerrit W. Gong for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gerrit W. Gong is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gerrit W. Gong until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:24, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ulisses Soares for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ulisses Soares is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ulisses Soares (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:49, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1934 establishments in Tuva

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Category:1934 establishments in Tuva requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_June_10#Category:1934_establishments_in_the_Tuvan_People.27s_Republic. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it 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. Le Deluge (talk) 13:45, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

As of 3:36PM on July 14, 2020 there were 967,791 articles in the BLP section.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:37, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

°== Future of Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament Choir and Orchestra page ==

Hello, sorry for bothering you. In case you have not received a notification in my reply to the furture of the said page, I have copied the message here. Though some most of this message is directed at User:Ajf773, you have been involved in some decision making, and so I am letting you know of what I feel:

Just in reply to Ajf773, you mentioned that the CBS is not mentioned in the Catholic Cathedral's Wikipedia page. Granted, this is true. However, though it isn't much, the CBS is stated in the Wikipedia page of St Mary's Pro-Cathedral. The Basillica's Wikipedia page, I think should solely be about the building and its history, as to why the CBS has its own Wikipedia page ... just a thought. Also mentioned, the CBS aren't notable. I would disagree with this as they were given the status of cultural ambassadors by the New Zealand government and have been on numerous World tours, including performing for the Mass at St Peter's Basilica in the Vatican (..."80 members of the touring group were invited to lead the singing in St Peter’s for the Papal Christmas Midnight Mass to inaugurate the Holy Year of Jubilee." [16]) and at Notre Dame in Paris. If they weren't notable, I don't think they would have ever been given this permission or opportunity to do so. On a domestic/local level, the choir and orchestra are well known within the various church and music organisations in NZ, as well as some orchestral players even employed at the Christchurch Symphony Orchestra. I hope this has changed your mind somewhat, but I see two other wikipedians have suggested it be merged with a building that will in future be demolished - something the CBS will no longer be apart of. I hope you are well. Lord A.Nelson (talk) 04:46, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looking forward to hearing from you. Thank you for your help!!Lord A.Nelson (talk) 04:57, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Religious institutions are institutions, they are never just buildings. If things are closely related the should be covvered by the same article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:16, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Midwest University alumni

A tag has been placed on Category:Midwest University alumni requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:40, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2020 July 20

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2020 July 20. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. SportsOlympic (talk) 14:06, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Comment

Hi John. As someone who closes a lot of AfDs I am used to seeing your participation. What I am not used to seeing is the level of bludgeon on display at Ulisses Soares. You had multiple people citing you, from your original analysis, as the reason to keep. I think it turns out the same way if you'd had 50% fewer bytes of discussion. Just a thought. Bet, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:23, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think you understand the frustration of seeing Ulisses Soares nominated a second time for deletion. Nor are you understanding how frustrating it is to in the last 2 years have had one editor nominate 70 of the articles I created for deletion. At least 3 articles I have created he has nominated twice for deletion in that time frame, he nominated articles I created for deletion before that cut off, and he has nominated several other articles I was a significant editor on for deletion. Also the comments of the editor who wanted to draftify come down to reeking of bigotry attacking the ability of members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to write reliable work. He also cites the wrong things, since we accept all Catholic bishops as notable and yet there are less than half as many Catholics per bishop as there are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints per apostle. Up until this nomination it was accepted that at least members of the quorum of the 12 and first presidency were default notable. The fact that the only two non-whites who have yet served in such postions, out of about 100 men who have held them in this dispensation are the ones who face deletion, is highly supicios considering how many enemies of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints attack it for having an all white leadership. This was a questionable charge in 2017 and before, ignoring much of those who actually hold leadership roles in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but it is a total ludicrous charge since 2018 but not neccesarily dead. There is a long history of trying to exclude articles on believing members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Wikipedia, and it is becoming harder and harder not to react to the antagonism inherent in it. The next shot across the bow seems to be an attempt to deny that members of territorial legislatures are default notable, which will be a key step in putting in Wikipedia the otherizing, orientalizing and colonializing frameworks used to justify denying members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the right to vote in the 1880s. There is a whole school of historiography that glorifies those who ran the oppressive colonialist regime in Utah that culminated in that total denial of rights, and the polices of those who wanted to delete the article on Ulisses Soares would privalege the writting of those who celebrate the denial of basic rights to my ancestors over the writing of those who see the whole process as the oppression that it was.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:12, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AFD on Freddie Brown

RE: at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Freddie Brown (American football), I removed the comments that seemed to me to be a possible violation of WP:BLP. I don't have any reason to think you made any intentional bad faith comments, just some that I think would likely to be challenged-and the policy BLP calls for such comments to be removed without discussion. I'm confident that you are eloquent enough to re-write the comments with a little more care if you just take a few moments to think it through. I also think you're most likely correct, that the page should be deleted. Anyway, that's what I did and I mean no disrespect by it. Please take a look and let me know if you want to discuss it.--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:37, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

The biography of living people category currently has 966,571 articles. If my past record is correct this means that over the last 2 weeks we have seen a net decrease of articles in this category. If that is true, I am very encouraged. This puts us at 33,429 articles short of 1 million. This means the category will have to rise at 213 articles a day to reach 1 million by the end of the year. It is 12:15 PM Eastern Daylight (US) time on July 28, 2020.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:17, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The average net growth since July 6 has been 137 articles a day. We may avoid hitting 1 million biographies of living people yet.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:19, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Günter Bechly‎ for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Günter Bechly‎ is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Günter Bechly (2nd nomination)‎ until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:30, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John R. Pfeifer for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John R. Pfeifer is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John R. Pfeifer until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:50, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:14, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and the punishment of action

I used to wonder why articles with only a non-reliable source like IMDb could languish on Wikipedia for over a decade. Now I see it is because if you try to do anything to change this unfortunate situation you open yourself up for attack.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:01, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

prods

I obviously disagree with sanctioning you but I wasn't able to find a prod log for you. I would encourage you very strongly to consider turning this feature on for the sake of transparency. Praxidicae (talk) 14:17, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:British people in Mandatory Palestine

A tag has been placed on Category:British people in Mandatory Palestine requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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.

This message was automatically delivered by QEDKbot. 22:18, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

As of August 7, 2020 at 8:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time in the United States there were 967,898 articles in the category biographies of living people.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:19, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This represents a growth of 4345 articles in the last 32 days, or an average of 136 articles a day. This is net growth, not only kept down by deletions but by deaths. To reach 1 million articles on living people by the end of the year the category would have to grow at a rate of 270 a day. I think we will avoid that dread reality this year.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:24, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How can you say school of other country as non-notable school?

You are an experienced editor from Michigan. But how can you complain that Saraswati Adarsha Vidyashram, which is a school of Nepal, not of USA, is a non-notable school? Do you mean that I should prepare article on only schools of USA which are notable for you? Only my argument, no hatred! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liambutera (talk • contribs) 01:36, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have consistently advocated that most secondary schools everywhere are not notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:13, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Farah Baker

I have closed this AfD as "keep", primarily because the arguments for delete were almost entirely vague policy references without explaining how they apply to this article. However, your comment "She may think she is the modern Ann Frank, but the coverage is not there to provide this inflated view of her own inportance" is not only an inappropriate argument to delete an article, but a personal attack on a fellow human being. Please read WP:BLP and WP:NPA carefully and do not do this again. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:22, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfD speed

Would you consider slowing down your AfD participation? Whilst I understand your perspective, when you reply to 7 afd nominations in 5 minutes one could get the impression you have not read the underlying articles or checked them even briefly. See 1,2,3,4,5,6,7. PainProf (talk) 02:29, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He is a super delete voter on AfD. I don't understand why he doesn't have positive attitude ever? I've noticed him for his negative opinion 😣 !!! Is he human or robot? This is not an attack, I really want to know his about. I have never seen his Keep vote on AfD. If I find his keep vote on any AfD, I will suicide myself 🤣. He never gives Keep on AfD. Cape Diamond MM (talk) 06:29, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The claim that I never vote keep is untrue. I do on occasion vote to keep. I find that most nominations for deletion are persuasive. We have major problems with articles on clearly non-notable people and promotional articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 10:51, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Cape_Diamond_MM, see

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Colombian emigrants to the United Arab Emirates

A tag has been placed on Category:Colombian emigrants to the United Arab Emirates requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:51, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

As of 2:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time the biography of living people category was to 968,316 articles. This represents a growth of 140 articles a day for the last three days.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:41, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reinstating the Wikipedia page for Robert Dorigo Jones

Hi Johnpacklambert,

We are writing to follow up on our request for the reinstatement of the page for Robert Dorigo Jones. We are not familiar with the Wikipedia editing process and wonder if we missed your reply. If you can use an email address, you can reach us at info@lawsuitfairness.org. Thank you. Our original note is below.

- Michigan Lawsuit Abuse Watch

The purpose of this note is to present a case for reinstating the Wikipedia page for Robert Dorigo Jones, a best-selling author whose book was published by one of the largest publishing companies in the world, Hachette. Wikipedia administrator, Tone, suggested contacting you about reinstating the page.

In addition to his book, Dorigo Jones’ work has also been featured on the editorial page of USA Today, by John Stossel on his FOX News program for 10 years (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaoOfswnojA), and on TV programs in at least five countries on three different continents and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGp4M9DCQaI

Dorigo Jones is considered one of the leading authorities in America on how excessive litigation has affected families, communities, professionals, job providers, governmental units and non-profit organizations. He is currently the president of Michigan Lawsuit Abuse Watch, a non-partisan issue advocacy organization that has recruited prominent community and business leaders from across Michigan for its board of directors. Its website can be seen at: https://www.lawsuitfairness.org/about and his book is available on many websites including Amazon: https://smile.amazon.com/Remove-Child-Before-Folding-Stupidest/dp/0446696560/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=remove+child+before+folding&qid=1596670151&sr=8-1

His op-eds have been featured in the largest newspapers in Michigan including the Detroit News, Detroit Free Press, the Lansing State Journal https://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/opinion/contributors/viewpoints/2020/04/22/frivolous-lawsuits-hurt-michigan-families-and-communities-viewpoint/2988535001/ as well as Newsmax: https://www.newsmax.com/insiders/bobdorigojones/id-454/

As president of a non-profit organization that is challenging one of the largest and most power special interest groups in America, the trial lawyers association, radio and TV hosts and producers have relied on his Wikipedia page for nearly 20 years when preparing for his interviews on their programs. Removing his page will put a small but respected organization at a distinct disadvantage when trying to give a voice to thousands of victims of lawsuit abuse across America.

One of those victims was a food bank operating in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Dorigo Jones helped the founder of the food bank get an article on the front page of the largest newspaper in Michigan when it was a victim of a frivolous lawsuit — a lawsuit that was eventually dismissed. See cite here: https://www.overlawyered.com/tag/beaumont/page/3/

Without Dorigo Jones’s efforts, thousands of victims of frivolous lawsuits filed by millionaire personal injury lawyers will not have a voice in the media. For ten years, Dorigo Jones wrote, produced and hosted a syndicated radio commentary that profiled these victims. We believe his efforts warrant inclusion on Wikipedia. Please let us know if you have any questions or need more cites. Thank you for your consideration.73.144.177.21 (talk) 21:43, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Egyptian emigrants to Yemen

A tag has been placed on Category:Egyptian emigrants to Yemen requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:26, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1934 establishments in Tanganyika

A tag has been placed on Category:1934 establishments in Tanganyika requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:53, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

Today as of 9:00 AM Eastern Daylight time there were 969,726 articles in the living people category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:02, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Ugandan emigrants to South Africa

A tag has been placed on Category:Ugandan emigrants to South Africa requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:26, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020

Please do not add or change content, as you did at List of state leaders in 1707, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.

You do realize that none of the current entries actually are sourced, right?John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:40, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but that does not mean you should continue to make the article worse by adding more and more unsourced content. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:59, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deprodding of Louis Age

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Louis Age, which you proposed for deletion. The subject clearly passes WP:NGRIDIRON, having played in an NFL game. PROD is for likely uncontroversial deletions, and it is expected that you check to see if an article meets notability guidelines before nominating. 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! Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:28, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For lightening the mood with some puns! Thanoscar21_{talk, contribs} 17:03, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Evening sir. I've noticed your involvement in several boxing related AfDs in the past so thought I'd bring your attention to this current afd. No worries if it doesn't interest you. – ².O.^Boxing 18:22, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Record labels

I saw your comments about record labels here. I agree with what you said, but I should tell you a few things. The two people you mentioned who monitor label articles are both record collectors and therefore have an interest in keeping these articles from being deleted, whether they have sources or not. They tend to make up their own rules. Years ago I tried to work in this area because I thought it would be easy to fix. You can probably find ample evidence of my failure. The Prods and Afds turned into crusades. Then I tried restricting myself to jazz labels, but that didn't work either. Then I tried discographies. Nope.
Vmavanti (talk) 00:02, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

There are as of 9:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Sep. 8, 2020 971,516 biographies of living people in Wikipedia. This means that the category will have to grow an average of 248 a day to reach 1 million by the end of the year. I hope this can be avoided but I have my doubts.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:06, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a guess, but I suspect there are many people who in the name of "inclusiveness" think this is good news, and that Wikipedia, instead of being selective and discriminating, ought to include as many people as possible, the more obscure the better. Obscurity to them suggests profundity, exclusion, if not minority or victim status. The more minor the figure, the harder these people fight to create articles for them and keep those article from being deleted. It's a crusade and like all crusades it's fanatical. But that's just my opinion. If I'm right, trying to reason with such people will fail.
Vmavanti (talk) 13:19, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has people on both the inclusive and the exclusive side. I used to be much more of an inclusionist than I am now. I have nominated at least 5 articles I created for deletion, and there are lots of articles I created in the past that I would not know. I think though Wikipedia has lots of problems specific with over inclusion of articles on the living. Our biggest birth-year category is 1989. It and 1988 are very close, and have been switching back and forth for the lead for the last year or more. The top birth year has not moved toward the present at a rate of one year a move, but slower. Back in 2008 or so I believe 1981 was the top birth year category. Still there are some professions where people are very unlikely to become notable by their early 30s (religious figures, academics, to a lesser extent politicians, come to mind very fast), so that being the top birth year is odd.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:47, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not on any side. I support no cause or movement. I'm not a fan or fanatic. I'm an editor who tries to be an editor, which is to say, impartial. Dividing people people into inclusionist versus deletionist is part of the problem. It's a false dichotomy. It approaches life as though it were football game. It's not a football game. I take every article and every problem one at a time. I don't group them into a collective abstraction that demands my loyalty and allegiance. It's not about choosing sides or teams. If you want, you can read my page to see where I'm coming from. I'm an American, by the way. There aren't many of us left.
Vmavanti (talk) 14:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia can be a grueling place.

You're from the midwest. That means you've got some common sense. I went to college in the state of Michigan and had a friend from Sterling Heights.
Vmavanti (talk) 14:17, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which college did you go to?

It was a small liberal arts college. There many in Michigan.
Vmavanti (talk) 14:22, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Red links on DAB pages

You might take a look at this and tell me what you think.
Vmavanti (talk) 16:04, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hilda Borko

Hallo, I came across this while stub-sorting and noticed that the birth date in lead and categories disagree. I see you added 1949 (12 years ago!) - but can't see where you found the info. Any ideas for a reliable source for either of the suggested birth dates? Thanks. PamD 16:06, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- I think I extrapolated the birthdate, back then I was more willing to guess, since then I have realized how wrong that could be. I am thinking to justify this article we need more sources period. The one source does not give a birthdate so I removed both.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:55, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I am sure I assumed 1941 from the 1971 graduation from the University of California, but that is an unjustified assumption without any actual sources backing it up. While a large percentage of people graduate from college in the year they turn 22, a whole lot graduate after and a few graduate before. I graduated with my bachelors in the year I turned 28, but I am somewhat of an outlier.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:57, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Catholic

Please do not remove "Roman" from instances of "Roman Catholic" and "Roman Catholic Church". Consensus is to keep it, especially where it provides an important distinction, e.g. between the Latin Church and the Eastern Catholic Churches. Elizium23 (talk) 16:27, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus was very clear that our article is "Catholic Church" because this is the common name.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:46, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Johnpacklambert, article name notwithstanding, "Roman Catholic" conveys extra information, and we take a dim view of people who try to delete it. The consensus is to keep it; if you want to change that consensus, then hold an RFC. Elizium23 (talk) 16:48, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Johnpacklambert, you of all people should be aware of our category structure. It is about more than one article name. Elizium23 (talk) 16:49, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - The article was renamed per a long discussion that showed this was the right form. The category structure has not been changed because of inertia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:50, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Articles, other than redirects, must live at one canonical name only, and "Catholic Church" is the best name for the whole Catholic Church. But if someone is a Roman Catholic, not just a Catholic, then we can link to the redirect in order to add that information. Elizium23 (talk) 16:53, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      - @Drmies: might be helpful here. Elizium23 (talk) 16:54, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        I don't know if I can be helpful, but I certainly agree with Elizium. Drmies (talk) 01:02, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Auxiliary Bishop

Sorry to impose but I need your voice again on this one:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffrey S. Grob

Roberto221 (talk) 16:40, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Italian emigrants to Romania

A tag has been placed on Category:Italian emigrants to Romania requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:24, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

c. 830 ≠ 830s

You cannot change, e.g., c. 830 to 830s as you did at Carloman of Bavaria. As the text clearly indicates, it is as likely and probably more likely that he was born before 830 than after, i.e., in the 820s. Srnec (talk) 13:23, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well in that case he belong in the 9th-century birth category. We should not be more precise than we can be accurate in such categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:25, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree. Going c.835 to 830s is fine. Srnec (talk) 23:14, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1941 establishments in Egypt

A tag has been placed on Category:1941 establishments in Egypt requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:40, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hold on please

It looks like you are mass categorizing Category:Converts to Mormonism to Category:Converts to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Has this been discussed somewhere? I'm not sure this is a good idea. If you look at the relevant sister-categories in the parent Category:Converts to Christianity you will see that they all take the form of Converts to [Religion], not Converts to [Church]. ~Awilley (talk) 05:30, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The term "Mormonism" is being very aggresively depricated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It should not be used in the way it is being used. In this case membership in the Church is very important, in ways that are not as explicit in other forms of Christianity, so the specific Church affiliation is inportant.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:33, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, I am not mass moving everyone. Some people in this category were people who joined what is now the Community of Christ. In those cases the category name itself was clearly and totally an incorrect designation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:34, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that the term "Mormonism" is now disliked by the church, but it's still unquestionably the name of the religion. ~Awilley (talk) 05:42, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) In this case, I'd agree with JPL. This is different from Christianity or even Judaism; in these groups, there are many sects/denominations, often with decentralized or loose governance, and movement is (usually) fairly fluid, or at least not uncommon. Mormonism on the other hand is overwhelmingly dominated by one church with very centralized governance. A convert to Christianity or Judaism can mean many things, but conversion to Mormonism overwhelmingly means converting to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. // Timothy :: talk 06:09, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will disagree with JPL and TimothyBlue. It has now been exactly 200 years since Joseph Smith experienced his "revelations" that were later published as the Book of Mormon, which inspired a big church that later fragmented into many other denominations. For nearly 200 years, the religion followed by the LDS church and all its its factions and splits have been described by the vast majority of LDS and non-LDS reliable sources as "Mormonism". For whatever reason, the LDS church, which was incredibly proud of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir when I visited Salt Lake City, and proud of the architecturally significant Mormon Temples in major cities, now rejects the word. In the early 21st century, the largest of the Mormon churches has chosen (for whatever reason) to "deprecate" the word Mormon, but that does not change the gigantic stack of reliable independent sources calling the LDS Church and this broader religious movement "Mormon". There are many churches besides the largest one that can be called Mormon. I do not think that Wikipedia should be an active participant in this gigantic religious rebranding exercise by the largest of many Mormon churches..l Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:34, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Awilley and Cullen above, such sweeping changes require discussion before carrying out. This also seems to go against the seeming consensus forming in the ongoing Missionaries (LDS Church) move request, which advocates Mormon as the common name. — Amakuru (talk) 06:58, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnpacklambert - you seem to have resumed the recategorizing mentioned above, despite several editors now asking you to stop. Please refrain from further WP:BOLD switching of categories, and initiate a discussion on this to seek appropriate consensus. I will be reversing the changes already made, pending proper agreement, per WP:BRD. — Amakuru (talk) 13:25, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the unilateral moving of articles into the new categories should stop. Clearly there is disagreement about what is appropriate for these articles. This dispute should be discussed, either at WP:CFD or somewhere else appropriate, but we should not just change long-standing categorizations without consensus to do so. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:06, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What should stop is the use of pejorative, depricated terms to describe people.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:07, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

Currently there are 973,163 articles in Category:Living people. The category will have to have a net growth of 266 per day to reach the dreaded 1 million by the end of the year.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:45, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hugo Asencio

I wouldn't have bothered with "proposing", as you did, but would had rather done an outright RfD Nomination. Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 01:55, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dennis Archer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Axelrod.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:12, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Finnish expatriates in Angola

A tag has been placed on Category:Finnish expatriates in Angola requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:33, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Insulting and crude

I've always respected your no-nonsense AFD votes and was shocked to see this insulting comment. I hope you took action. I'm currently involved in a number of AFDs where this same editor is leaving messages for the closing admin to wait a week because this editor plans on improving the article. I shake my head at the world these days. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:31, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Magnolia677, I left this on their talk page & would be willing to take this to the ANI if they fail to apologize. Celestina007 (talk) 17:27, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Celestina007, Magnolia677, ping me if this goes further.

If the user in question would like to discuss my comment, I am happy to do so, but as he neither responded nor commented and rather removed the comment, I'll need some sort of sign from him that he would like to do so. Of course, anyone may take any matter to ANI if they so choose.

Magnolia677, not sure what the beef is about my needing time to go to libraries or why you're posting in on this userpage (except to bring an old, unrelated comment that JPL removed without addressing). I'll respond briefly to your issues about the AfDs here because here, for whatever reason, is where you brought it up. Libraries in my area are operating, but with skeleton crews, and there is an extended time between item circulations than before the COVID pandemic. It feels like more people are reading than before -- who'da thunk that would be so inconvenient? But it is, because the available copies may not be enough, or they may be on the other side of the county. So it takes a few more days than usual for books to come in, and even when that happens, I may not be able to get the book the day it arrives because I may miss the 4-hour window the library is open because hours of operation are limited as well. I understand you may be eager to see AfDs close, but I am probably just as eager to do the most thorough review of all available sources. I've done it enough times and no one's ever taken offense to it before, but please bring it up at ANI or cite something that says I oughtn't do that if you feel it is inappropriate. In the future, it would be more direct to raise your concerns about my comments on my talk page, your talk page, or in the AfD discussions, though on an (I think) uninvolved editor's talk page also works, especially if I get pinged. Hope that helps! DiamondRemley39 (talk) 18:43, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I shall also respond to the portion of the section that is relevant to the presently silent editor. John, I am sorry if you were offended by my comment referenced above. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 19:28, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Duped articles for Jack Gerard

Good afternoon - I wanted to let you know that I just put up merge templates at both Jack Gerard and Jack N. Gerard, which are currently two distinct articles that appear to be about the same person. I mention this to you here because I see you created both (I'm sure inadvertently) albeit several years apart. Please let me know if I can comment further. KConWiki (talk) 19:33, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think using the heading "duped" is not wise, because this is a very with a meaning that does not actually coincide with duplicate. That said, I had no idea that there were two articles. The Jack Girard article is clearly as it stands now a relic of the past, basically stuck in no later than October 2012 when the idea there might be a Mitt Romney presidential administration was a viable idea. As a general authority he is normally designated Jack N. Girard and I didn't even think to see if there was already an article about him without his initial. I had no idea that I had actually created such an article. When you have done over 350,000 edits on Wikipedia, and created hundreds of articles, you do not remember every article you have created. If I had been more thoughtful about my approach to Wikipedia I would have probably started a running file of all the articles I had created at some point. It would be well over 200, but I have no idea how many more, and would involve many articles that have since been deleted or are redirects. Clearly this is the same person, and the articles need to be merged. I would say stay with Jack N. Girard and merge in any needed information from the Girard article, although I am not sure in a broad historical perspective the deep discussion of the floated idea that Girard may have been made Prresident Romney's energy secretary is worth keeping. We are not an archive of every discussion that has occured in a newspaper. It does not appear there is an actual merge proposal at present, at least I was not able to find one. O would clearly support it. 13 years and 350,000 plus edits leads to some mistakes like this over the years.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:55, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think using the heading "duped" is not wise, because this is a very with a meaning that does not actually coincide with duplicate. That said, I had no idea that there were two articles. The Jack Girard article is clearly as it stands now a relic of the past, basically stuck in no later than October 2012 when the idea there might be a Mitt Romney presidential administration was a viable idea. As a general authority he is normally designated Jack N. Girard and I didn't even think to see if there was already an article about him without his initial. I had no idea that I had actually created such an article. When you have done over 350,000 edits on Wikipedia, and created hundreds of articles, you do not remember every article you have created. If I had been more thoughtful about my approach to Wikipedia I would have probably started a running file of all the articles I had created at some point. It would be well over 200, but I have no idea how many more, and would involve many articles that have since been deleted or are redirects. Clearly this is the same person, and the articles need to be merged. I would say stay with Jack N. Girard and merge in any needed information from the Girard article, although I am not sure in a broad historical perspective the deep discussion of the floated idea that Girard may have been made Prresident Romney's energy secretary is worth keeping. We are not an archive of every discussion that has occured in a newspaper. It does not appear there is an actual merge proposal at present, at least I was not able to find one. O would clearly support it. 13 years and 350,000 plus edits leads to some mistakes like this over the years.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:55, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above duplication was not at all intentional. I thought it had not posted and then posted it again.
A big part missing from the Jack N. Girard article is any mention of his boy scout leadership position.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:05, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:British people in colonial Hong Kong

A tag has been placed on Category:British people in colonial Hong Kong requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:01, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:British emigrants to Turkey

A tag has been placed on Category:British emigrants to Turkey requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:13, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Seychellois expatriates in India

A tag has been placed on Category:Seychellois expatriates in India requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 13:36, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1977 establishments in Mali

A tag has been placed on Category:1977 establishments in Mali requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:52, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian satirists

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian satirists requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:16, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Iranian emigrants to Afghanistan

A tag has been placed on Category:Iranian emigrants to Afghanistan requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:17, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1978 establishments in Iraq

A tag has been placed on Category:1978 establishments in Iraq requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:30, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tracker

There are now 976,802 articles in the biographies of living people category. This represents a net average daily growth rate of 129 per day since I last reported it. To hit the dreaded 1 million articles by the end of the year we would have to average 317 net article growth a day for the rest of the year. I sincerely hope this does not happen.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:50, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get this. If you were talking about unsourced or low quality BLPs, fine, otherwise what's the issue? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:57, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no way that Wikipedia has the actual resources to maintain 1 million articles on living people the way they need to be maintained.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:58, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh right. Good luck convincing the WMF of that. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:00, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As an example of what I mean, I just came across an article that in the article it stated the subject died in 2009, but the article was still in the living people category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:01, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I notice this is not the first time you have added a post to your talk page like that. Can I suggest that for a better response / result, you create a user page, and possibly a script to update them? For example, I started tracking unreferenced BLPs of women and we now have a bot for that - see User:SDZeroBot/Unreferenced BLPs/Women. So there are 106 BLPs there that should have top priority. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:18, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hanumanthegowda

Hanumanthegowda - Kindly participate in the deletion discussion. Thank you.TamilMirchi (talk) 16:55, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bruno Turner already has a long bio article in the standard reference work on classical music

The first paragraph can be viewed free at https://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000043616?rskey=GoCFIt Therefore the delete rationale is invalid. Did you realise this when you !voted? 08:17, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

October 2020

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Donald Wuerl, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 19:31, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

the change was supported by the existing text of the article. the article clearly documented Wuerl had at times been resident in Italy which clearly makes him an American expatriate in Italy.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:18, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing "clear" about it -- see talk. Elizium23 (talk) 20:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Elizium23, what are you templating a regular? Celestina007 (talk) 23:33, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Celestina007, per WP:TTR I find it a neutral and uniform way to inform users of problems with their edits and I don't see why that should be confined to noobs. Elizium23 (talk) 23:38, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Radclyffe Furness

The article Radclyffe Furness has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Notability not established

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ThurstonMitchell (talk) 14:16, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1717 establishments in Hungary

A tag has been placed on Category:1717 establishments in Hungary requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:09, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Bengaltsy" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Bengaltsy. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 2#Bengaltsy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 17:03, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on categorisation structure for immigrants

As you've been involved in categorisation of immigrant-related articles for many years, could you lend your suggestions on the removal of "descent" parent categories, as here and here amongst many others for example? Note both the categories contain subjects who identify as either Venezuelan-Portuguese or Australian-Portuguese, in which case the parent category should be correct for both cases. As per my understanding, the "emigrant" categories usually have people who migrated to their host country for the long-term, and in most cases became permanent residents or citizens. Is there a new consensus regarding how to sort these categories that I'm not aware of?

Last year, the same was effected across hundreds of "expat" categories. Although I had queried Rathfelder then, I was not linked to any discussion and it appeared to be their personal interpretation of how the structure should be. Which would be fine if its due to a previous discussion/consensus, but rather problematic if it's a unilateral change being forced across several hundred cats. Also pinging Rathfelder and the category expert, BrownHairedGirl. Mar4d (talk) 04:22, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As an addendum to the query last year, the Category:American people of South African descent currently has neither Category:South African expatriates in the United States nor Category:South African emigrants to the United States sorted into it. Even if I accept that to be correct in the case of the former, removing it from the latter is rather strange given how many South African-American subjects it has. It would also imply that we would have to effectively double categorise many articles into both Category:South African emigrants to the United States and Category:American people of South African descent, given the first no longer acts as a subcategory of the second. Mar4d (talk) 04:34, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In my view a person who migrates into Foo does not from Boo does not thereby become a Fooish person of Booish descent. That description applies to their children. Becoming a national of Foo is a separate process. Some articles say that a person acquired Fooish citzenship, but most dont. So in my view it is not appropriate to categorise immigrant categories as people of Booish descent. That should be applied to individual articles and based, like other categorisation, on what is in the article. Rathfelder (talk) 11:22, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Descent and immigration status can be complicated. For example Carlos Manuel (footballer, born 1985) while born in Venezuela is not a person of Venezuelan descent. Both his parent were Portuguese. I suppose he was born a Venezuelan citizen (though being born in a country does not always make you a citizen) and he might be a Portuguese citizen, either because of his parents or because he moved there and became one, but the article does not say. Rathfelder (talk) 11:31, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your first example, I think that is tedious and would lead to overcategorization. Essentially, you are proposing that a person who immigrated to Foo and became a naturalised citizen there would need to be sorted into both Category:Booian emigrants to Foo and Category:Fooish people of Booish descent. What that means is that we have thousands of such people who are incorrectly only sorted into "emigrants" (and not "descent"), when previously, the assumption was that "descent" acts as a parent category and subsumes emigrants (thereby removing the need for "emigrants" with citizenship to be sorted into "descent" also). I am comfortable with the idea of "descent" categories only directly having articles of people born in that specific country (or descended from immigrants), but as far the subcategories go, I'm still not comfortable with the idea of removing "emigrants" as a subcategory of "descent" as it severely disrupts the category indexing structure. Also, I think the "expat" categories too should be retained in the "descent" categories purely for navigational purpose, and because the "descent" cats act as the top-level category for all Booians in Foo. Mar4d (talk) 11:48, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They dont have to be overcategorised. We only use categorisation where it is defining. Migration is different from descent. It does not subsume it and using it to do so is at best superfluous and usually misleading. Expats certainly do not belong in the descent categories. Rathfelder (talk) 13:20, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need to look at things from standard usage issues. Any country in the Americas grants birthright citizenship. If someone is a true emigrant they are described as being a national of the country. This is not a true test of citizenship. The line where someone stops being an expatriate and starts being a national is iffy. I would say it needs to be determined on a case by case basis, although in many cases it is pretty clear. I think that any immigrant is clearly a person of the given descent. Descent descirbes their ancestry, but it can be quickly applied. I have to admit my bigger worry is that in some cases we categorize by trivial amounts of ancestry that the person so categorized was unaware of. That we should avoid.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:16, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- The one thing that might in theory mess things up is that people can immigrate more than once. There are cases of people who moved from Iraq to Israel at age 5 and then moved from Israel to the United States at age 35. I think though we want to link emigration categories under descent categories to avoid overlap. Either way I think we should reserve descent categories for those who were never nationals of the ancestral area in question. The slightly trickier issue is should we put a person of French-Canadian descent who emigrated to the US in the category Category:American people of French-Canadian descent? I think the answer is yes, but I think we also need to do a better job of ensuring that people in irregular descent categories are also in emigration categories where they apply.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:28, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On the issue of expatriates I would state that a person who is a South African expatriate in the United States is in no way an American, and should be excluded from any category that classifies them as such. We should also have a rule that says that people should not be in both expatriate and emigrant categories for the same two country relationship. On how tricky this is Jeffrey R. Holland lived a total of 5 years in the United Kingdom and clearly belongs in Category:American expatriates in the United Kingdom (he is in a specific sub-cat), on the other hand Dieter F. Uchtdorf, has essentially lived over 20 years in the United States and has US citizenship, so he almost certainly belongs in the category Category:German emigrants to the United States. Ulisses Soares has spent well over 10 years in the US, will most likely live most of the remained of his life in the US, but I am unconvinced we should put him in a category other than Category:Brazilian expatriates in the United States.

Thanks to Mar4d for raising this, and for pinging me.

I reckon that this is fairly simple: the vast majority of people who migrate from any given Country1 to any given Country2 have roots in Country1, are therefore of Country1 descent. Yes, there are exceptions, but except in cases of serial population displacement, such exceptions are very rare. So Category:Booian emigrants to Foo should be a subcat of Category:Fooish people of Booish descent.

I am also concerned by Rathfelder's conflation of the broad concept of nationality with he legal status of citizenship. The world doesn't operate that neatly, and there are many cases of people who have lived for generations in a country without gaining citizenship: see e.g. Turks in Germany#Citizenship. The category system cannot possibly accommodate all the quirks of citizenship and nationality law, and can group people only under broad concept of being associated with a place rather by legal assessments which the sources rarely include.

The effect of Rathfelder's changes is to remove the vast majority of emigrants from descent category trees in which they belong. Per WP:CAT, the main purpose of categories is navigation, but these changes impede navigation. I hope that Rathfelder will self-revert them.

I also note that sadly this is just the latest in a long series of episodes where Rathfelder has made extensive changes to categories on the basis of wildly flawed understandings of the concepts. I am very disappointed to find us back yet again in this situation.

I also suggest that this discussion should be moved to a central venue such as WT:CATP. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:43, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would say for helping navigation we should put emigrants categories under the descent categories. On further thought, to help navigation we really should put the expatriate categories under the descent categories. I also have to second the avoidance of strict interpreation of categories by citizenship. If we did that in some cases we might class people with countries in which they never lived, which is its own level of absurdity. Movement of this discussion is also wise. If someone creates a new venue could you please place a link to get there here.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:49, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In some cases there is also a large overlap between Fooian people of Booian descent and Fooian expatriates in Boo. See for example Lou Perez (musician) who was both an American of Cuban descent and an American expatriate in Cuba, or Gerrit W. Gong who is both an American of Chinese descent and was an American expatriate in China. These are quite different cases. In Gong's case both his parents were born in what is now the US (he was born before Hawai'i had statehood, hos mother even more so, but it was a US possession when his mother was born there, it would be more complex if his mother had been born there before annexation). His father was born in Merced (we have an article on him, Walter A. Gong) and I believe Elder Gong's paternal grandparents were born in the US (I was personal friends with Elder Gong's son, I onced asked him if his maternal or paternal ancestors came to the US later, he had to pause and think about it before answering). Gerrit W. Gong lived in China as an adult as a US state deparment employee. Lou Perez lived in Cuba as a child when his immigrant father decided to return to Cuba for a time. These are distinct enough categories that we need to put a person in both. The one exception is James E. Talmage does not belong in Category:American expatriates in the United Kingdom, an immigrant should not be put in an expatriate category back to his place of birth, even though it is technically correct. Is Talmage is Category:American Mormon missionaires in the United Kingdom. Realiztically even though he lived the first 8 of so years of his life in Britain, this is probably a realistic desciption of what he functionally was as president of the British and European Missions in the 1920s.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:04, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Johnpacklambert and BrownHairedGirl: Thank you for your responses. I will second what you have said, particularly with respect to the following per WP:CAT: The central goal of the category system is to provide navigational links to Wikipedia pages in a hierarchy of categories which readers, knowing essential—defining—characteristics of a topic, can browse and quickly find sets of pages on topics that are defined by those characteristics. Just to clarify, I think both the "expatriate" and the "emigrant" categories should be retained under "descent", purely for navigational and "hierarchy" purposes. The names of those categories itself (expatriate, emigrant) is self-defining and self-explanatory enough (as to what contents they contain), and should not be a reason to remove them from "descent", because doing so impedes navigation IMO and is more unhelpful than helpful. I'm happy to move this discussion to a more centralised venue, but preferably only if there's a disagreement here. Rathfelder, your thoughts in light of the above? Cheers, Mar4d (talk) 16:40, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- I think there is are fundamental distinctions between descent, migrant and expatriate categories. I have spent many years working in immigration law. Citizenship law is very complex and varies from country to country and from time to time. I cant see how it helps to link them together, and I think this discussion is led by local American practice where it is common to describe immigrants as Fooish Americans. I dont think this happens elsewhere. Expatriate categories are generally for people who can be expected to return to their country of origin. They certainly cannot be treated as related to categories of descent. Rathfelder (talk) 16:52, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'd like to pertinently clarify on my behalf that I'm not conflating "descent", "emigrant" and "expatriate" together. Rather, I think it has been discussed fairly extensively above as to what the defining characteristics for each are, and how to distinguish between these three. Instead, I am merely trying to arrive at a conclusion (in a categorisation context) that how can we find descent, expatriate and emigrants together under one umbrella for navigational purpose. Just as how the article South African Americans deals with all South Africans in the United States (citizens, non-citizens, expatriates etc.), there should also be a top-level category for South Africans in the U.S.; the solution which has been suggested above, and which I find to be most practical, is to make "emigrants" and "expatriates" a subcategory of "descent". By doing so, we aren't actively merging these two into descent (rather, they continue to maintain their distinctiveness by virtue of their separate existence), but rather making them easier to find using a hierarchical structure under a top-level category (that being descent). Hope it's clearer now. Mar4d (talk) 17:10, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a case of US v. the rest of the world. It is more complex than that. Most countries anywhere in the Americas, plus New Zealand and Australia and several other countries have longstanding cases of immigrant groups who identify with both the homeland and the receiver country. There are also cases of this in other parts of the world. However in some areas you start getting into ethnic populations who do not fit easily into these descent categories. Such groups as Albanians living in Northern Macedonia, Kosovo, Serbia and Montenegro, Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Armenians anywhere outside the current political boundaries of Armenia, large Greek populations in the old Ottoman Empire, Hungarian in Romania and I could name others are ethnic groups. It is not that these people have ancestors that came from the current countries, but that they identify with the ethnic group and often did so before the current country had come to be. This does not easily mesh onto the fooian of booian descent tree.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:20, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The link higher up should have been to Walter Gong.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:59, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

November 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Ernest Simoni. Elizium23 (talk) 00:27, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What in the world are you talking about. I made the link agree with the name of the page in Wikipedia. The article is Catholic Church. Thus it makes sense to have the link go to Catholic Church.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:07, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Johnpacklambert, I see that you haven't bothered to join in the WP:RFC that is currently active. Status quo applies. Elizium23 (talk) 22:46, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- What RFC? It would be way more helpful if you provided a link.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:30, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  Johnpacklambert, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism#Catholic vs Roman Catholic Elizium23 (talk) 16:03, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1939 establishments in Guatemala

A tag has been placed on Category:1939 establishments in Guatemala requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:07, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Senegalese expatriates in Burundi

A tag has been placed on Category:Senegalese expatriates in Burundi requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:07, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Michael T. Griffith for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Michael T. Griffith is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael T. Griffith until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Doug Weller talk 12:26, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Yugoslav medical doctors has been nominated for renaming

Category:Yugoslav medical doctors has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 18:36, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American Catholic writers has been nominated for merging

Hi Johnpacklambert, I have nominated the above category, which you recently created. I think it overlaps with another existing category. Would be happy to hear from you there: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2020_November_11#Category:American_Catholic_writers. Thanks, Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:48, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:British people of colonial Barbados

A tag has been placed on Category:British people of colonial Barbados requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:06, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Canadian expatriates in British India

A tag has been placed on Category:Canadian expatriates in British India requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:07, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Replying to your comment on AFD for Daniela Di Bartolo

Hi, apologies that I'm replying here instead of in discussion, but I wasn't aware of it until now and it has already been closed. Just wanted to reply to your comment does not meet our ludicously overbroad inclusion criteria for footballers.

Please have a look at WP:FPL and notice how many men's leagues are included and how many women's leagues? See there are only two women's leagues? That barely counts as ludicously overbroad when only two leagues are automatically presumed notable. --SuperJew (talk) 08:34, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Women's leagues are not included because they do not get coverage to justify inclusion. Wikipedia creates articles following coverage, it does not engage in this unjustified attempt at Afrirmative Action you are doing. Wikipedia does not have the structure to adequately keep up the articles it has, there is no reason to try to create inclusion criteria that will give us just more articles that will just be sitting junk.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:12, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The criteria for inclusion in WP:FPL is not amount of coverage, but rather a league being "fully-pro", meaning how much players get paid, which is skewed for women as part of worldwide gender bias. --SuperJew (talk) 12:56, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eugene Haynes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lincoln University.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:36, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia needs an end to unsourced content."

While I agree that no article should be unsourced, please stop using this as an argument - especially as your sole argument - at AfD. With the exception of BLPs, sources do not have to be in an article for the article to be retained. They only have to exist to satisfy the relevant policy, WP:V Accordingly, every time you use this argument (and again, in most of the cases I have seen it is your only argument) you demonstrate either a lack of knowledge or a willful disregard of Wikipedia policy, which given the amount of time you have been on the project is concerning. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 09:00, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The ignorance of the need for sourcing content is a clear violation of verifiability. People who create articles should cite their sources and we should stop codlingling their failures.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:13, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2003 establishments in Myanmar

A tag has been placed on Category:2003 establishments in Myanmar requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:29, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian expatriates in the Austrian Empire

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian expatriates in the Austrian Empire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:55, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfD for deaths due to COVID-19 and related RfC

Hi. Thanks for commenting at the recent AfD for the above list. There is now an ongoing discussion around the best way to split the list, if any, if you wish to comment further. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:36, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dr Mark Bagshaw

I have given up on Wikipedia given the decisions it makes on deleting quality articles but this is one that truly deserves to be reversed. Maybe in death Wikipedia can see merit in Mark Bagshaw that it didn’t in life.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/teenage-tragedy-led-to-life-advocating-for-disability-reform-20201126-p56i43.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by SproulesLane (talk • contribs) 07:13, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Imperial Russian civil engineers has been nominated for merging

Category:Imperial Russian civil engineers has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 20:59, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Imperial Russian electrical engineers has been nominated for merging

Category:Imperial Russian electrical engineers has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 21:00, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly Living People

Hi Johnpacklambert. I just wanted to bring to your attention that, per the description of the living people category (which is included in the description of the possibly living people category), "Individuals of advanced age (over 90), for whom there has been no new documentation in the last decade, may be removed from this category and transferred to Category:Possibly living people." Thus, individuals who are known to be under the age of 90 should not be placed in "possibly living people" (unless, of course, there are sources explicitly documenting their unknown living status) and should remain in the living people category. Thanks! Canadian Paul 05:43, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Swiss French language writers

A tag has been placed on Category:Swiss French language writers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:24, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Universal Coin & Bullion

Hey Johnpacklambert I'm trying to find someone to help me with an article. The above article was proposed to be deleted and I want to see if you could participate in the deletion discussion and I wanted to know if there was anything I could do on my end for the article. I never had an article proposed to be deleted so I'm still new to the process on my end.--Excel23 (talk) 21:36, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Emigrants to the British Empire

A tag has been placed on Category:Emigrants to the British Empire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:03, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Ethnic Albanian photographers

A tag has been placed on Category:Ethnic Albanian photographers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:05, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian Orthodox rabbis

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian Orthodox rabbis requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:04, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian-German people

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian-German people requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:08, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Mandatory Paletine emigrants to the United States

A tag has been placed on Category:Mandatory Paletine emigrants to the United States requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:09, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Pre-Confederation Canadian expatriates

A tag has been placed on Category:Pre-Confederation Canadian expatriates requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:16, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Russian Empire fencers

A tag has been placed on Category:Russian Empire fencers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:23, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Holy Roman Empire emigrants to the Thirteen Coonies

A tag has been placed on Category:Holy Roman Empire emigrants to the Thirteen Coonies requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:01, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian art historians

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian art historians requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:01, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian children's writers

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian children's writers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:02, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian fabulists

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian fabulists requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:03, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian historians of religion

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian historians of religion requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:04, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian writers in Arabic

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian writers in Arabic requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:05, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian beekeepers

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian beekeepers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:33, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian cellists

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian cellists requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:34, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian classical scholars

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian classical scholars requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:35, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian critics

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian critics requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:36, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian navigators

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian navigators requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:38, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian neuroscientists

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian neuroscientists requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:39, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Istanbul v Constantinople

Hi! Just noticed this edit to Madame Bey. Generally I think it's best to use the name it was known as at the time, "Constantinople", in Ottoman contexts since in English it was known as such. (I know some modern works refer to the Ottoman city as Istanbul but there are others that do not)

However at the first instance I indicate that it's now Istanbul (the US State Department switched names in 1930 as did UK sources)

WhisperToMe (talk) 07:57, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We do not follow English conventions at the time. I had professors who insisted it should be referred to as Istanbul at any point after the Turkish conquest in 1453. You would not insist on calling Liverno Leghorn at any point, even thought that was the convention at the time, and you are not going to change every reference in an article to someone who was African-American in the 1950s or 1960s to use Negro. In this case we should use the accepted Turkish name from the conquest by Turkey and not the Greek name.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:07, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Which classes were they in? Which subject?
- Anyhow I read about the issue and in modern Turkey it is indeed considered politically incorrect to use "Constantinople" to refer to the Ottoman city. But outside of usage in Turkey or by pro-Turkey concerns there is no agreement/consensus to always use Istanbul in Ottoman contexts unlike with say African American/Black (modern) versus Negro/Colored (antiquated): Lay people/academics of Greek and Armenian ancestry often still have a preference, for example, of using Constantinople for the Ottoman city, which reflected a time when non-Turks made up a larger share of the city than they do today. I have a preference of using both names to appeal to all groups, but then primarily using Constantinople for the Ottoman city.
- I think an example of where an antiquated name is still used for a historical period is Leningrad in World War II contexts: It is known as St. Petersburg today but was known as Leningrad at the time and still is referred to such in those contexts: I have a preference for Constantinople because it reflects a historical reality different from post-World War I Istanbul today. I haven't heard of Livorno having a historic English name (though I know Regensburg did) though it would be an interesting subject to contemplate.
- WhisperToMe (talk) 20:56, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BTW you might be interested in this discussion Talk:Constantinople#RFC_on_whether_to_change_the_end_date_of_this_article_to_1930. There was a suggestion that "Byzantine Constantinople" and "Ottoman Constantinople" should be separate. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:02, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The subject was history of the Middle East. Leningrad is a case of a name that was the official name at the time, that is a very different issue than we are facing here. Istanbul began to be used by Greek speakers to refer to the city in the 11th-century, or at least something similar to Istanbul.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:00, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The debate linked to above shows huge numbers of academic sources have accepted the style of using Istanbul for any reference to the city after 1453.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:04, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd be interested in seeing the list!
- Constantinople was officially used in French and English (in publications by the Sublime Porte): for example the French version of the Ottoman Constitution written by the Ottoman government referred to the capital as Constantinople while the Ottoman Turkish version used the word "Istanbul". I've read that "Konstantiniyye" was also officially used in Ottoman Turkish by the Ottoman authorities.
- WhisperToMe (talk) 14:14, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - QWikipedia does not use official names. It seeks to use current scholarship on a name, and the clear push of current scholarship is trending towards using Istanbul for any post-1453 reference to the city.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:17, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - I stated that in reference to "Leningrad is a case of a name that was the official name at the time" as I pointed out the same was the case with Constantinople. I would be interested doing a catalog of what scholarship is doing now regarding this name and I am open to an RFC about this.
    - You might also see similarities with Talk:Zhang_Xueliang#RFC_for_Pinyin_vs_WG_names in which many modern journalism/academic sources use "Zhang Xueliang" (People's Republic of China spelling) to spell this Republic of China citizen's name even though the government he served under at the time (Republic of China) used Wade-Giles, that he never switched allegiance to the PRC, and that he used "Peter Chang" later in his life, reflecting the ROC allegiance. One of the commenters in the RFC noted that this is a political issue, and I see the same with Istanbul/Constantinople.
    - WhisperToMe (talk) 14:22, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I can see that you are one of the radicals who wants to rewrite history and pretend that Turks only gained control of Istanbul in 1924, and ignore that it has been under Turkish control since 1453.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:26, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Saying that the Ottoman Turks themselves used Constantinople in French (and an equivalent in Ottoman Turkish) does not imply at all they didn't have control of the city. It says the opposite, that they had control and actively used the Greek-origin term. WhisperToMe (talk) 14:35, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Current scholarship uses Istanbul for this period, unless it is radical scholarship derived from within Greek nationalism.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:37, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - In that case it might be good to start an RFC so the examples of modern scholarship and what they say may be chronicles. Hope this helps! Talk:History_of_Istanbul#Should_the_name_"Istanbul"_be_used_for_the_Ottoman_city_instead_of_"Constantinople"? WhisperToMe (talk) 15:10, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian physicians

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian physicians requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:49, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Russian Empire immunologists

A tag has been placed on Category:Russian Empire immunologists requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:13, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian Roman Catholics

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian Roman Catholics requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:59, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Finnish emigrants to Austria

A tag has been placed on Category:Finnish emigrants to Austria requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:24, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:French emigrants to Austria

A tag has been placed on Category:French emigrants to Austria requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:26, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:French emigrants to Isarel

A tag has been placed on Category:French emigrants to Isarel requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:27, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian Orthodox Jews

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian Orthodox Jews requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:56, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Lithuanian emigrants to Romania

A tag has been placed on Category:Lithuanian emigrants to Romania requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:03, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Russian Empire internal exiles

A tag has been placed on Category:Russian Empire internal exiles requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:26, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Imperial Russian Roman Catholics

A tag has been placed on Category:Imperial Russian Roman Catholics requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:25, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Penny O'Brien

So mate! Hello! You said she doesn't have enough to be one of actress in Wikipedia? Then how??? I've seen a lot of Wikipedia article worst and without sources yet be accepted and I'm here getting rejected by thousand..i said don't nominate it for speedy deletion without giving me the reason? What do you want me to do? Add million of movies?? Photos of rdr2 (talk) 19:07, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect a huge number of articles on Wikipedia need to be deleted. It is a slow process to remove all the low quality ones that have accumulated over the years.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:44, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

David J. Whittaker

Just wanted to give you a heads up, I nominated the article David J. Whittaker for deletion, and noticed you were the creator. I wanted to give you a chance to respond. I nominated the article because it reads like a curriculum vitae. I am super loath to delete anything from Wikipedia probably to a fault though, so I am interested in your perspective on this if I am wrong. Epachamo (talk) 15:12, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of David J. Whittaker for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David J. Whittaker, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David J. Whittaker (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Douglas R. Harper for deletion

Hello Johnpacklambert, I have added my opinion (Keep) on the deletion proposal discussion. I wish to point out that it is very difficult to find "third-party" sources for someone who has created a website. People are interested to the content, and usually not on the author. Many of the data contained in the article have been provided to me via email by himself, and I see no reason to doubt about them. I think he has done a vast and excellent work and that he deserves to have a short biography on Wikipedia. Best wishes, --Gab.pr (talk) 16:11, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Linguists from the Russia Empire

A tag has been placed on Category:Linguists from the Russia Empire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:37, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

This is wishing you and yours a merry Christmas and a prosperous new year ahead. Celestina007 (talk) 20:43, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

File:Christmas tree in field.jpg	Merry Christmas Johnpacklambert
	Hi Johnpacklambert, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very happy and prosperous New Year, Thanks for all your contributions to Wikipedia this past year, like this tree, you are a light shining in the darkness. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:07, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Diplomats by ethnicity has been nominated for deletion

Category:Diplomats by ethnicity has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:Namiba 19:13, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maggie Lettvin

John,

Why did you change her category to "Possibly Living"? Somebody wished her a happy Thanksgiving on Facebook, and she responded. And there would be an obituary when she dies. She's very well-known in Boston and at MIT. Paulmlieberman (talk) 20:03, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook is not a reliable source, especially responses on facebook. None of the sources in the article are within the last 10 years.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:04, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I will give in and put her back in living people, but the sourcing is exactly the type that generally suggests a person belongs in possibly living people when they are over 90.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:06, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year

Happy New Year 2021
I hope your New Year holiday is enjoyable and the coming year is much better than the one we are leaving behind.
Best wishes from Los Angeles. // Timothy :: talk

Category:American women scientists of Chinese descent has been nominated for discussion

Category:American women scientists of Chinese descent has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 16:55, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NNTR

It's nice to meet you. I'm the proud parent of a 40-year old beautiful, happily married wife and mother who joined the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints many years ago. My grandson will soon go on his mission... Anyway, I completely agree with and appreciate your stance on no smoking. I'm sure I've done myself in, smoking on and off for so many years. It's sad when parents smoke in the car with a kid in the car. Sometimes the child shows up to class smelling like cigarette smoke- just terrible. Anyway, thanks for taking a stand. Happy Better New Year. Be well. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 21:53, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:German emigrants to Egypt

A tag has been placed on Category:German emigrants to Egypt requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:19, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Venetian emigrants has been nominated for merging

Category:Venetian emigrants has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 20:39, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Lambert (naval historian)

When I saw that on the list of AfDs I was hoping you'd comment and sure enough you did :). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:12, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lmao, JPL definitely had to put the disclaimer affixed to his vote. Celestina007 (talk) 02:23, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CFD formatting

Hi Johnpacklambert. I have been closing quite a few CFDs lately, and have encountered several opened by you. I am finding that there is a problem with the formatting you use for the CFD on the discussion page. Specifically, the tag you place on the category page is not linking properly with the appropriate section on the CFD discussion page. This is usually because the category link is linked to a subheader with the name of "Category:FOO" but the section on the CFD discussion page is actually named "FOO". Users who encounter the notice on the category page are not being linked directly to the discussion.

To remedy this, be sure that you are using the appropriate templates when you post the discussion on the CFD discussion page rather than manually adding them as regular text edits. The appropriate template is found at the base of the tag you place on the category.

I hope this makes sense. I know it is hard to describe in the abstract, but if you follow the instructions at WP:CFD#HOWTO, things should work out for you. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 04:38, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To illustrate the problem (this might be easier to understand), go to Category:Indigenous American female aviators and click on the link from the template. It takes you to the discussion page (here), but doesn't link you to the correct section of the page, which is here. It can be difficult for users to find the correct section, especially if they are unfamiliar with CFD discussions. Anyway, using the templates avoids all of these types of problems, which is why they were created. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 05:12, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Italian expatriates in the Russian Empire

A tag has been placed on Category:Italian expatriates in the Russian Empire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:59, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:British people of colonial Malaya

A tag has been placed on Category:British people of colonial Malaya requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:29, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Universities and colleges in Historical Germany has been nominated for merging to Category:Defunct universities and colleges in Germany

Category:Universities and colleges in Historical Germany has been nominated for merging to Category:Defunct universities and colleges in Germany. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 16:19, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tomos Roberts

Hello John Pack Lambert... I would, kindly and respectfully, ask that you reconsider - without fear or favour - your vote to delete the page in question.
Thank you,
Ryan (Ryancoke2020 (talk) 09:55, 20 January 2021 (UTC))[reply]

Category:Holy Roman Empire people

Category:Holy Roman Empire people is a new duplicate of Category:People of the Holy Roman Empire, so I have nominated it for speedy merging. – Fayenatic London 10:44, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Establishment in Taiwan categories

I'd like to make it first clear that I don't care how the articles are categorized. However, there are many, many, many establishments dating from Qing/Japanese eras that are still put in Taiwanese categories. Right now I'd still like to put the two articles in Taiwanese categories for the sake of consistency. Is CfD the place to merge everything? That's something I'm not very familiar with yet. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 14:14, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Japanese era is different. Taiwan was an exterior colony of Japan, not considered an integral part of the homeland. Under Qing rule Taiwan is no more different than mainland China than was Hainan.14:21, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Ok, disregard Japan, but my main question was with CfD for getting the rest of the Qing era categories merged. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 15:27, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It probably is a good idea. This would cover the years 1683 (which currently only has the article Taiwan under Qing rule) to 1895. That is potentially 212 categories. In reality there are 72 categories. The majority of these categories have 1 article, and I am not sure any have 5+. This is a dauntingly high number of categories to include in a nomination. To show why I am hesitant to do it look at Category:Imperial Russian people, it took me over a week to tag all the articles there, and after the nomination sitting for well over a month with no one saying anything in actual opposition to using Russian Empire people, at the last minute someone throws a wrench in the system and starts pushing to use People of the Russian Empire. It feels like utter laziness by others, no one helped me tag the totality of the articles, people stood obstructionist until I did, and at the last moment an inteloper comes in any tries to disrupt all my work. This makes the whole thing super frustrating, and is one of the big reasons why I avoid these category discussions. They require too much work, and all you ever get is insulted and denigrated by some of the editors involved. No one appreciates the hurculean nature of the labor they request to actually get any results, and people are constantly dreaming up schemes to make even more categories part of a series, and thus making it even harder to get any actual results. To even start this nomination I would have to be ready to devote at least 3 hours to tagging all these categories, all 72 of them, and I am hesitant to undertake such a taks, especially since there is a cabal that seems determined to just oppose anything I propose period.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:39, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That Russian CfD is a big chunk I'm not going to read. I get that this nom will take quite some time, but emptying Category:1856 establishments in Taiwan and waiting for it to be deleted just seems like a sneaky attempt to circumvent the CfD process. I'm inclined to move the two articles back for now and wait until one of us gets around to filing a nom and we get a consensus from CfD. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 15:57, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Doing that would allow one editor unilaterally to impose their will on the system. Categories can be created with no discussion, no sourcing, no anything. They really just represent the view of one editor, and I see no reason to leave them imposed when doing so goes against historical reality.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:17, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Baird's Manual of American College Fraternities

I invite you to comment on the suitability of using Baird's Manual of American College Fraternities as a RS at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Baird's_Manual_of_American_College_Fraternities.Naraht (talk) 14:10, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Russian emigrants to Bahrain

A tag has been placed on Category:Russian emigrants to Bahrain requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:11, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I guess this draftification explains that one. – Fayenatic London 21:47, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am tired of the attacking lies

I am tired of being falsely accused of creating the category Category:American women novelists. I am even more tired of the slipshod commentaries published by an ultra-liberal paper being used to engage in character assasination against me.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:17, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Even more tiring is the inability of people to discuss the way Wikipedia would be best set up without engaging in rude attacks on other editors.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:17, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia needs to stop being an IMDb mirror

It is high time Wikipedia stopped being an IMDb mirror.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:18, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am tired of down right rudeness on Wikipedia

The rudeness of some editors on Wikipedia has gone over the top. They fail to even try to assume good faith, and attack with total rudeness the contributions of others.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:19, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Uncivil and hostile comments and edit summaries. Hope you are well, // Timothy :: talk 13:56, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Living people

The dred day was postponed. We avoided reaching 1 million entries in Category:Living people in 2020. At present we are at 986,682. My conservative guess is that there are currently 1,000 articles in that category that in the article state when the subject died but no one has bothered to move them out of living people and to the appropriate category for dead people. I found at least 3 articles like that just yesterday going through a small part of the contents of Category:1926 births.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:55, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Would a Petscan request not help? Looking up a simple intersection between 2020 deaths and Living people returns 12 articles (including one family and 2 couples though, for which the intersection is understandable). I'm a bit scared to launch the request for the whole of Category:Deaths by year but it would probably turn out a part of what you're looking for. Place Clichy (talk) 17:14, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That helps, but it seems to only find those who are in both categories at once. The ones I find tend to say in the article "Jane Doe died in 2014" but have not categorized by it.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:20, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for that lead. Unfortunately it only covers when they have been categorized by the year died. Lots of editors add in information on the death but do not change categorization. This may in part be because if you access Wikipedia on a phone it is much harder to see categorization. There may be other reasons as well.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:31, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Parenting categories

Hi John, please may I encourage you to search the existing hierarchies and add further parents when setting up categories? Most categories are intersections of at least two parents, but I noticed that you only put one parent on each of Category:Holy Roman Empire emigrants and its sub-cats.

Looking around would also have saved you from creating the duplicate Category:Holy Roman Empire people. It must surely have struck you as improbable that there was no category already for those people. – Fayenatic London 18:42, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A suggestion re WP:BEFORE

This note is intended as constructive criticism from one native Michigander-Wikipedian to another. I noticed a concerning trend in your recent AfD nominations. You have nominated 13 articles for deletion in the last month. Of those, only one has been closed as "Delete". The others have either been closed as "Keep" or "No Consensus" or remain pending with current voting not favoring deletion. Your nominations from the past month are as follows:

Silas Bartsch: pending, currently split 1 "Delete", 1 "Keep"
Jack Wasserman: pending, leaning "Keep"
Marie Yanaka: pending, leaning "Keep"
Gordon Salkilld: pending, leaning "Keep"
Shaquille Walker: pending, leaning "Keep"
Miriam Marz: Closed as "Keep"
Dick Martin: Closed as "No Consensus"
Hinarere Taputu: Closed as "Keep"
Leon Lissek: Closed as "No Consensus"
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbara Radecki: Closed as "Keep"
Brenda Liz Lopez: Closed as "Delete" (beauty pageant contestant)
Bekhan Tungaev: pending, leaning "Keep"
Outer Drive: Closed as "Keep"

Of course, we can't predict for sure how the pending AfDs will close, and I raise this only for purposes of assisting in self reflection. As a strong content creator (e.g., John S. K. Kauwe III, Hennric David Yeboah, Marvin S. Hill, Plum Grove, Kansas, Elliot Kenan Kamwana), you know how much effort goes into researching, writing, and building an article. With that personal experience, I would simply suggest that you redouble your WP:BEFORE efforts before nominating additional articles for deletion. Thank you for reading this. Best regards, Cbl62 (talk) 22:27, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Education

I am reading a humanities text written by my old department chair, Todd Britsch. I decided to see if he is still alive (in the body), so I googled him and got to the Wikipedia article that you seeme to have started in 2008. What about this solid academic and administrator makes him notable for an encyclopedia? I can see he belongs in a Who's Who In Mormon Academia, but not much else. I had a great deal of respect for and gratitude toward Brother Britsch. I don't know if you're willing to answer me at moabalan@yahoo. I don't keep a spot on Wikipedia. Alan Rasmussen, Y class 1974 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8800:FF10:1B00:ED6A:82C1:62F1:B28D (talk) 17:27, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of suggestions

Hi, wishing you a happier new year than you seem to have been having so far…

May I suggest that you archive this talk page, as it is rather large?

Also, please check the links from the category page when you are manually creating CFD discussions. In this edit you created four separate sections, yet the banners on all the category pages linked to the same section heading "Russian Empire people". Even if you had removed that heading from the Cfr template on e.g. Category: Imperial Russian people of Polish descent (like you did here), the default heading for that one would have been "Category:Imperial Russian people of Polish descent", but you just used "Imperial Russian people of Polish descent" (omitting "Category:"), so the default link would still not have found your separate nomination on the page. I find it's always worth double-checking the links at the end.

Hope this helps. As it happens, following a rather convoluted series of events involving at least three editors, the relevant nominations are now relisted (and correctly linked) at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 January 26. – Fayenatic London 22:05, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]