User talk:Cabayi/Archive 5

January - December 2018

barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		You're really helpful person. Thank you very much. — Masum Ibn Musa  Conversation 10:20, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Prod removed on A Bank for the Buck

You proded this with a rationale "Nothing notable about this book". I have deproded it because even a cursory Google search finds reviews from Times of India, Business Today, Hindustan Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Free Press Journal. Notability is quite clear here. --Michig (talk) 08:32, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox UK school

Template:Infobox UK school has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox school. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Steven (Editor) (talk) 19:31, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

MeKin2D

I hope I made compelling enough arguments against the deletion of the above-named article in its talk section. Note that others are duplicating MeKin2D's style of representing variable parameters. Please see for comparison https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stephenson_III_dwell_mechanism.gif VERSUS https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESpEFJZp-co Thank you. Pasimi (talk) 20:40, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Pasimi, please explain at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Simiprof. Cabayi (talk) 23:37, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

AppZen

Hi there curious why you deleted the AppZen listing. Where do you draw the line with the 5000 other startups on here? This is a significant AI tech. Expense reports have more to do with the common person than a lot of the other meta listings and companies. There are good sources.

04:22, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Josh — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoshAnish (talk • contribs)

JoshAnish, Firstly, I didn't delete it. I'm not an admin.

I requested it should be deleted because I thought it wasn't notable and because (I don't recall the article in detail) it seemed to me to be promotional, the sources were too closely related to the business, the details were about the funding rather than the business.

The line of argument concerning "the 5000 other startups" is often referred to as WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS, a title which accurately conveys the community's view. -- Cabayi (talk) 10:48, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Vague recollection coming back to me... was this the article sourced mainly by references on PR Newswire? That's not a WP:RS or WP:IS. Cabayi (talk) 11:15, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Cabayi, That's fine but your somewhat whimsical request for deletion, in which you no longer remember something you decided merely the day before, erased hours of time and care spent on the research. And the shrug for us to read the Crap Exists link is just a license for arbitrary behaviour.

JoshAnish (talk) 15:32, 14 January 2018 (UTC)JoshAnish

JoshAnish, If you'd rather that I encourage you to waste your time writing about non-notable businesses I can do that. Personally I think it kinder to tell you that in this case you picked a crap topic to write about. At the risk of continuing to upset you I'll point you at a truism. You're obviously capable of writing good articles and I sympathise that your work got deleted, but not every business is notable. I hope you pick a better topic to write about next time, one worthy of your effort. Cabayi (talk) 18:42, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Channel manager

Hello Cabayi. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Channel manager, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is no indication that user:Havarb made this up or that they personally know someone who made it up. Thank you. ~ GB fan 12:29, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

GB fan, It seemed to me a made-up technology name tied in to their attempts to promote Draft:HotelOnline. Cabayi (talk) 12:34, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

GB fan, thanks for declining the speedy deletion. Looks like the page was deleted after all, though? Did this happen by mistake? Can you undelete it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Havarb (talk • contribs) 12:47, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Havarb since RHaworth deleted it you will need to talk to him about having it restored. ~ GB fan 13:07, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

GB fan Thanks. Did that, and the page was restored. It is pending review on Draft:Channel_manager. Would you remind reviewing it, since you had already deemed it adequate? :) H (talk) 14:55, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Havarb, I didn't deem it adequate. I didn't think it met the speedy deletion criterion that was applied. That speedy deletion criterion requires two parts, one that the article clearly indicates the article creator or someone they personally know created it and two that there is no credible claim to significance. I did not see a clear indication in the article that you or someone you know made up Channel manager. At that point it failed the speedy deletion criterion and I declined it. I did not look any further as it didn't matter. The article will work its way through the AFC process and someone will review it. ~ GB fan 15:07, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Charlie Hurley

I have added sources and expanded the Charlie Hurley (Irish republican) article. I hope that the deletion tag can now be removed? Best Jdorney (talk) 21:22, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Jdorney, Thanks for seeing to that. The PROD tag has been removed. I've also disambiguated the two Toms & reused the references where possible. Hope that looks OK to you. Cabayi (talk) 22:43, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Looks good, thank you. Jdorney (talk) 00:40, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stewart Levenson (2nd nomination)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stewart Levenson (2nd nomination). — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:35, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

OSTree

Hi - just a note to say that I've undeleted OSTree, which you nominated for PROD, following a request on my talk page. You may want to consider AFD. Optimist on the run (talk) 18:03, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Optimist on the run, I'd be happier if it had been restored to Draftspace or Userspace to be improved rather than let it linger unimproved in mainspace, but it's your call. Cabayi (talk) 19:29, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, it's just a contested PROD. How you proceed with it is up to you. Optimist on the run (talk) 20:04, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Optimist on the run, And as far as I'm concerned, I'm not going to run the risk of being accused of misusing PageMover to gain the upper hand in a dispute and losing the right as a consequence. The purpose of WP:REFUND is to allow the author, Treutwein, to improve the article, not to put it back in mainspace unchanged. You restored it, how you proceed with it is up to you. Cabayi (talk) 20:42, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Gary Howard Klar

Absolutely, listen to this interview where he addresses his football career. http://iconsoffright.com/news/2010/05/gary_klar_audio_interview.html Ducktech89 (talk) 06:34, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Drive Appreciation

		Thank You
		Thank you for reviewing articles during the 2018 NPP New Year Backlog Drive. Always more to do, but thanks for participating. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 05:13, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks & Apology

Hello. I just wanted to drop a note here to thank you for fixing my numerous mistakes made in attempting to create an archive of the 2017 messages posted on my talk page. I will try to be more careful in the future, and I apologize for the trouble, but within the last month, my editing here has been impacted by personal illness which has at times affected my ability to properly handle such things. Just wanted to let you know that because if the illness was not a factor, I likely would have been able to make the necessary archive without messing up so many times. Sorry about the trouble I caused in this regard, and thanks so much for your help in rectifying the situation. Hopefully when I next need to create an archive on my talk page (a year or so from now), I will get it right the first time. Thanks again. --Jgstokes (talk) 01:42, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: 2020 Democratic National Convention

Hello Cabayi. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of 2020 Democratic National Convention, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: 3.5 years since the AfD which was deleted per toosoon. DOn't think we can rely on a time argument after 3.5 years. . Thank you. GedUK  13:55, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Ged UK, if the article contained any new, sourced information I'd agree with you. Without any such content it still seems toosoon to me. It'd be a dull world if we all agreed though ;-) Thanks for letting me know. I'll let it drop. Cabayi (talk) 13:59, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

I've left the PROD still on there, so I can't see it lasting beyond its 7 days. It just doesn't quite fit CSD in my view. GedUK  14:32, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Reason for deletion

Hello, why is Mohammad Reza Tirgar removed? This person is famous and famous actor.Nikanpc1920 (talk) 12:51, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

It hasn't been deleted yet. Follow the instructions given in the notice if you want to contest the deletion request. Cabayi (talk) 12:56, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Nikanpc1920, Your claim that he's famous doesn't become true just because you keep repeating it. You need to show, by reference to reliable, verifiable, independent sources (not his own website) that he is notable - specifically in this case that he meets Wikipedia's requirements for notability laid out in WP:FILMMAKER or WP:NACTOR. Hope that helps, Cabayi (talk) 13:39, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Cabayi, Honestly, I do not know much about Wikipedia, if you can keep this article for me. I'm compensating. Thank you Nikanpc1920 (talk) 13:50, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Nikanpc1920, I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean by "I'm compensating". Cabayi (talk) 13:52, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Cabayi, They told us they should pay in Wikipedia to record a person. We gave up to $ 1,000, but did not register. Nikanpc1920 (talk) 13:55, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Nikanpc1920, They? Who are "They"? Cabayi (talk) 14:10, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Cabayi, These

Nikanpc1920--Additionally, you paid about 1000 $ to whom? ~ Winged Blades^Godric 14:23, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)I'm afraid that you've been scammed.See this page for more details but the modus operandi may slightly vary.I will advice you to immediately contact the functionaries at functionaries-enlists.wikimedia.org mailing all the details (emails, chats etc.) of your conversation with the person who promised you an article and/or took the payments.~ Winged Blades^Godric 14:16, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

@Cabayi:--See this.~ Winged Blades^Godric 14:25, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Winged Blades of Godric, I wasn't sure of what to make of them but, since the descriptions are so non-descriptive, the images are unusable. I've nominated them all for deletion as "out of scope". Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 20:10, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Cabayi, $ 1,000 is paid and nobody is accountable. Please register this article. Nikanpc1920 (talk) 14:30, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

این نشان برای شما!

	نشان مهربانی
	thank you Nikanpc1920 (talk) 14:28, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

I'd appreciate it more if you weren't somebody's sockpuppet, and you hadn't offered to pay me to withdraw a CSD, but Thanks - I guess. Cabayi (talk) 22:42, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Disabling Cats when moving articles to draft

I must admit I didn't check it out when you moved Love Productions to draft but the categories were not disabled per WP:DRAFTNOCAT. I was sort of wondering about this but was distracted and thought must be ok and created even more categories. A bot has just done a smacking and sorted it out. Just a small note to check for the future. On a really positive note that sorttable is working sweetly. NB: Love productions is mentioned on perhaps 20/30 articles on Wikipedia ... some were previously redlink (I confess to creating a few more which I wouldn't normally do but I'll revert them if the article does make article namespace ... it was easier than visiting 30 odd pages twice and I wont be revisiting. Thanks for your help.Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:05, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Djm-leighpark, you're right. Luckily (for me) there's a bot that tidies up that kind of mistake. Cabayi (talk) 17:26, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:Brandosancho/sandbox

Hello Cabayi. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Brandosancho/sandbox, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Seems promising, if only because it's a duplication of Astronautica. Thank you. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 12:08, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Multiple TWO speedies declined

I don’t see how WP:CSD#U5 applies to sandbox pages that contain legitimate drafts of encyclopedia articles. Some older ones might qualify as abandonded drafts, but that’s a seperate issue. U5 is only for people engaging in self-promotion or other unacceptable behavior in userspace, it is not for attempted draft articles. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:57, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Beeblebrox for the heads-up. Tackling the U5's one-by-one:

• User:Yeowdy/sandbox is a close copy of User:Yeowdy/Clawhammer Abortion where Serial Number 54129 removed the U5. We discussed it at User talk:Serial Number 54129#Was this accidental? resulting in moving the draft to Draft:Clawhammer Abortion. It makes no sense to have two drafts of the same material so I'll redirect the sandbox to the draft so that, if Yeowdy should ever return, they can find their material
• User:Yawnzy/sandbox - I'll draftify as Draft:Toque (band).

I looked at User:Siljaleknes/sandbox which although it wasn't my nomination, was adjacent in tour contributions, "multiple" suggested I should be looking for more than two, and I thought it might have been. I agree with Jon Kolbert's assessment of it as a self-promotional piece by a musician which links to their own website, a contributor whose sole contribution is this puff. That seems the very definition of U5. Cabayi (talk) 08:48, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Margaret & David - Ex concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Margaret & David - Ex, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:34, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Note Draft belongs to Heibechan, Special:Diff/801037016. AfC review is on Heibechan's talk page. Cabayi (talk) 04:07, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at User talk:Primefac#' vs ’

 You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:Primefac#' vs ’. —usernamekiran(talk) 10:33, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Leoni Wiring Systems Southeast

Hello, I'm AirWolf. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Leoni Wiring Systems Southeast have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks.--AirWolf ^talk 13:09, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

virtual intellectual property organization inc

I disclosed my bias on my user page. The organization is proven notorious. There are many independent references to it and its importance in the area of law and the establishment of virtual intellectual property. All of which is cited by indepenendet references included in the article and which have obviously been ignored by the proponent of the request for deletion. VIPO is an important piece of a story even already on Wikipedia (Richard Minsky page, Slart trademark dispute). The company was behind this entire action and is single handedly responsible for bringing and defending the first virtual intellectual property case to the courts and before the USPTO. If that is not noteworthy i do not know why there is anything at all published here. I disclose my bias on my user page...the sources and references cited are independent!! i admit im not the best programmer i would appreciate your hep in cleaning the article up but definitely NOT deleting it...if slart is on minksys page then a VIPO page needs and deserves to exist!. period.Ill accept your comments for correction but will most definitely and vehemently refuse deletion. it is a very important component of that entire conversation.JurisAmat (talk) 12:10, 15 March 2018 (UTC)jurisamat

JurisAmat, If you were here to contribute to wikipedia I'd happily take the time to help you out. However, you're just here to advertise your business, and I have no interest in working as an unpaid copywriter for your company. Cabayi (talk) 12:31, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

not true .. i simply want the organizations contributions to be available for the public so the truth is out there. how would a creator understand otherwise how minksy achieved these results? he had legal assistance. we are not a for profit company...we provide these services to independent creators and i want them to be able to find us. if our creators who we represent but not the organization itself are credited with its successes then how will others receive the help that they need??? isnt TRANSPARENT dissemination of that type of information what wikipedia is about??? and i do need help!! please be kind...JurisAmat (talk) 15:10, 15 March 2018 (UTC)jurisamat

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It documents things which are already notable. It doesn't exist for you to publicise your business. Cabayi (talk) 22:14, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

It seems that you do not understand my position, or do not want to, so i will not continue this conversation...thank you...i appreciate your efforts and service on behalf of the wikipeding public however you are wrong in this instance. it happens to us all :) have a gr8 day.JurisAmat (talk) 11:46, 16 March 2018 (UTC)jurisamat

RedSeer Management Consulting

Hello. G4 did not really apply as the AfD closed as soft delete and it had been restored per WP:REFUND. It was also deleted per G11. We will see how creator's appeal on deleting admin's talk goes.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 21:47, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Dlohcierekim, I've replied on the other thread at User talk:JamesBWatson#Request for Undeletion. Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 09:26, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: NoeX 2.2

Hello Cabayi, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I deleted NoeX 2.2, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided. The speedy deletion criteria are extremely narrow and specific, and the process is more effective if the correct criterion is used. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 11:56, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Dennis Brown, the article's opening edit summary said it was an April Fool's joke, the first version of the article stated it was an April Fool's joke, the first version was deleted as an April Fool's joke (hoax), your summary in the author's log states that you blocked him for an April Fool's joke, yet my CSD calling it an April Fool's joke (hoax) for a second time was wrong and it's only a test and I need to review the criteria... really? Cabayi (talk) 12:07, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

• • That was just a template. Anyone creating an article with their use name gets a user name block. How it is deleted, under hoax or test is meaningless, the tools popped up and I just instinctively chose "test" for april fool jokes. The account is very likely a sock of someone and is based on a hoax name, I'm pretty sure we haven't lost anything by blocking that account. Mainly, april fools jokes need to stay out of mainspace. See WP:Rules for fools, and how we tag them on the way out is kind of meaningless. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 12:14, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Dennis Brown, The difference is that in changing the deletion rationale for a "kind of meaningless" reason I get told off like a naughty child. Cabayi (talk) 12:19, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Not by me. Personally, I don't sweat small stuff like that anyway, I'm more concerned if the CSD tag (for any reason) is appropriate, and it was. In the end, it's my responsibility to insure criteria is met. "Test" is kind of a catch all cat anyway. Sorry about the template, I had no idea it would even do that if I selected something other than what you chose. That is Twinkle doing it automatically, not something I intended to do. I've struck it. BTW, I just deleted the article again, blocked another (the same) editor. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 12:25, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Margaret & David - Ex

Hello, Cabayi. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Margaret & David - Ex".

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 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.  » Shadowowl | talk 14:00, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Greater Palmerston United FC

Um, Cabayi is the Greater Palmerston United FC page okay now? I'm not sure what I was doing wrong. Any ideas on what I could do better? Please check the page before you reply, as I changed it up quite a bit. I used the information that was available to me for it. This is Abdullahok. Also, I'm quite new to Wikiedia editing. (Abdullahok 1900 Australian Central Standard Time 2 April 2018)

Abdullahok, Nowhere near to OK. It's playing in a league which doesn't have an article, and is presumably not notable either. It has no claims to notability. It has no reliable, verifiable, independent sources. Have you had a look at WP:NFOOTY to find any guidance on where the threshold lies? At present, and at the risk of sounding rude, you're wasting your time trying to polish a turd.

Please use some links when you're asking for comment. Looking for Greater Palmerston United FC is a heck of a lot easier than looking for Greater Palmerston United FC. And please sign your posts with 4 tildes ~~~~ which will add a sig & datestamp like Cabayi (talk) 10:26, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Abdullahok, just one additional note of caution. You've had three versions of the article deleted now. The next version is likely to get the title WP:SALTed. Hope that helps, Cabayi (talk) 13:01, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Mito Mobile

Hello Cabayi. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Mito Mobile, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Subject might be important/significant (see also Google News/Books hits for this subject) / use WP:PROD or WP:AFD instead to allow other editors to participate in this decision. Thank you. SoWhy 11:52, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Your edit to Northland Properties

Hi Cabayi! In regards to the note left in your edit summary, the article states Denny's Canada, which is owned by Northland Properties through a licensing agreement with Denny's (which is a publicly traded company). I will make sure to add a source when the under construction template is removed. Cheers, Daylen (talk) 06:13, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Upcoming changes to wikitext parsing

Hello,

There will be some changes to the way wikitext is parsed during the next few weeks. It will affect all namespaces. You can see a list of pages that may display incorrectly at Special:LintErrors. Since most of the easy problems have already been solved at the English Wikipedia, I am specifically contacting tech-savvy editors such as yourself with this one-time message, in the hope that you will be able to investigate the remaining high-priority pages during the next month.

There are approximately 10,000 articles (and many more non-article pages) with high-priority errors. The most important ones are the articles with misnested tags and table problems. Some of these involve templates, such as infoboxes, or the way the template is used in the article. In some cases, the "error" is a minor, unimportant difference in the visual appearance. In other cases, the results are undesirable. You can see a before-and-after comparison of any article by adding ?action=parsermigration-edit to the end of a link, like this: https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Arthur_Foss?action=parsermigration-edit (which shows a difference in how {{infobox ship}} is parsed).

If you are interested in helping with this project, please see Wikipedia:Linter. There are also some basic instructions (and links to even more information) at https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-ambassadors/2018-April/001836.html You can also leave a note at WT:Linter if you have questions.

Thank you for all the good things you do for the English Wikipedia. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:18, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Durgesh Nandan

Hello Cabayi, I was trying a lot to delete the account durgesh066 but I don't get anyway. Please help me in that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Durgesh066 (talk • contribs) 03:40, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Looks like that problem's been fixed for you. Cabayi (talk) 04:11, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion

You violated Wikipedia's rules about good faith edits... my page MrBeast is very notable... I also noticed that you have a track record of marking artices for deletion before even considering them notable or not... please be more careful in the future with AFD. Best Regards, TheRealWeatherMan (talk) 21:07, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Shall we look at the facts? MrBeast was first deleted on 5 March by IronGargoyle. You created a draft at Draft:MrBeast on 26 March which was declined by Heliosxeros the next day. You resubmitted on 30 March and the draft was declined the same day by MatthewVanitas. You then decided to skip the AFC process and create the article directly in mainspace where I nominated it for deletion and Anthony Bradbury did so.

There you have at least five editors in agreement that MrBeast is not shown to be notable, and you have been repeatedly told so. Where is the good faith in ignoring the reviews you've been given?

The first version of the article was created and deleted before you created an account. The persistent shilling for MrBeast, the short gap between that first version and your first draft, and some of your other activities which are uncommon for a new user, all raise the uncomfortable question of whether you are the sockpuppet of the creator of the first version. Since I'm not an admin I can't gather the evidence necessary to raise a request for further investigation.

Finally, you mention two deletion methods in your complaint, neither of which was the method I used. Cabayi (talk) 06:16, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Whether any person at all can be seen as notable purely on the basis of contributing to You Tube is arguable. What is not arguable is that any article about any person must have good, independent second-party references. This article had none, and would have been deleted anyway on that basis if there had not been more obvious and more immediate deletion reasons.----Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 11:57, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

ArtPremium

Dear @Cabayi:, thank you very much to review the article. I lost three hours trying to translate the French article to English using the wikipedia tool, hopelessly. I wasn't focused enough and made this enormous obvious mistake on the title, I can't understand it. There is also a link to the Stanford University Library that is missing. Corrections are made. Let me know if that's good for you? Best, Philippe49730--Philippe49730 (talk) 08:48, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Philippe49730, There's more difference between the English wiki and the French wiki than just the language. Enwiki has been seen as a free advertising platform by too many and has policies in place to ensure that it remains an encyclopedia, not the yellow pages.

In particular you need to show that ArtPremium is notable supported by reliable, verifiable, independent sources. That means sources more substantial than entries in business listings, government company registries, Bloomberg and the like.

The most substantial source I see is for an exhibition partly arranged by ArtPremium, rather than for ArtPremium itself.

As a business ArtPremium fails to meet the requirements of WP:NCORP. As a magazine, maybe it's notable, but I don't see any evidence of that in your article.

You've written about where it's sold, the subjects it's covered, all the stuff you'd expect to see in an advert (and the article hovers around the line of what might be considered, and deleted, as an WP:ADVERT), but it contains nothing about who has written about ArtPremium. If the next issue didn't appear, who would notice? Find a couple of those and you're on the road to an article. rHope that helps, Cabayi (talk) 09:41, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Dear @Cabayi:, I wasn't expecting to built the entire article, but you were right that it wasn't clear enough regarding other articles for comparable subjects on the english wikipedia. At least, this will bring content for the french wikipedia. All my very best, Philippe49730--Philippe49730 (talk) 16:03, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

User:Soopaphilb/Freddie Neese

Per WP:STALE, unfinished draft articles userspace drafts may be moved to draft namespace ... if the original author no longer wants them or appears to have stopped editing ... the rule of thumb is to wait at least one year after both the editor who created the page and the editor whose space it is in (should they not be the same) have stopped editing. Hence, it would be technically permissible to move User:Soopaphilb/Freddie Neese to Draft:Freddie Neese (which would make it eligible for G13 in six months), though I do not personally approve of the practice (when it is used solely to seek deletion at a later time). Conversely, there is no guideline justification for non-authors to apply the unsubmitted form of {{afc submission}} to userspace drafts. Best regards, — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 02:10, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

So, as I read it, you see no acceptable way of clearing away this abandoned WP:REFUND? I hope MfD will be acceptable.

As for your comment about afc tagging, yours is the first objection I've come across. It's generally a good way of encouraging inexperienced editors to get a second pair of eyes before publishing a previously failed draft back in to mainspace. Regards, Cabayi (talk) 14:12, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Godsy, Your point about draftifying suggests you might want to support my suggestion at Wikipedia talk:Drafts#Draftify. Cabayi (talk) 14:35, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

I've clarified "draft articles" by changing it to "userspace drafts" (which is what "draft articles" referred to in that instance). — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 19:36, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

TV

Fita, Channel:INtv dan BeritaSatu News Channel, ENTV, Heri diblok rawaeli simawe en:TV televisi Manda 1993

Manda-Logtco --DiAceh (talk) 07:28, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

This is the English language wikipedia. Contribute in English. I've already posted guidance on your talk page which you've ignored. Cabayi (talk) 07:30, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia - Manda 1993 !

Bahasa Langsa, indonesia Global Selace Baru, Manda 1993 Ygri simef, facebook Langsa vdrm solampesim --DiAceh (talk) 07:49, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

I've already posted this over on your talk page, but here we go again, since repetition seems to be your thing... Mohon jangan menambahkan teks berbahasa Indonesia di Wikipedia bahasa Inggris. Suntingan Anda akan lebih dihargai di Wikipedia bahasa Indonesia. Please do not contribute text in Indonesian to the English Wikipedia. Your contributions are more than welcome at the Indonesian Wikipedia. Cabayi (talk) 07:54, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Hertfordshire spike

Thank-you for your interest in this topic. Yes, I think it would be a good idea to have a category for these structures. I suspect people will point to examples outside the county, but I think it would be a good sub-category of Churches in Hertfordshire.....here goes. --Thoughtfortheday (talk) 15:20, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Two MFD Nominations

You have created two MFD nominations for .js files, but the .js files themselves are apparently not tagged either for speedy deletion or for MFD. I am puzzled. Do you need administrative help, or did you forget to tag the files that you want deleted? (I can try to tag them, but you can probably state the rationale better than I can.) Robert McClenon (talk) 17:53, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Robert McClenon Feel free to try editing another user's javascript pages if you like. Both users were informed on their talk pages, and who else needs to be informed? Both pages have been speedied as I requested. Cabayi (talk) 18:08, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, here's another for you to try out your magic... Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Saša Matić/monobook.js. Cabayi (talk) 21:15, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

The inability to tag a .js page for speedy deletion is a bug, and a weird one at that. Robert McClenon (talk) 10:47, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, No, it's a pretty basic safety precaution to prevent another user introducing a malicious bit of javascript into your setup. Suppose they included Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/WikiBreak Enforcer with a long expiry date into your common.js?... Cabayi (talk) 11:23, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

User:Cabayi - Hmmm. A misfeature. A less-than-desirable consequence of something having a purpose. Then there should be a queue for requests about stupid .js files. I suppose that requests are rare enough that there isn't cause to have a noticeboard. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:40, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Reply to your comment on emancipation of minors

Hi. First, thank you for your welcome message and the links — much appreciated. You are right that I should read more on editing as I'm struggling a little to make it come out as I want. I'm also uncertain as to whether editing your talk page is the correct place to respond, or if I should have replied on my own talk page and somehow directed your attention to it. Apologies if I picked the wrong solution.

My understanding is that a minor is prevented from 'holding an estate in land’ under section 1(6) of the Law of Property Act 1925. I'm not a lawyer, so I might be wrong, but I think that all land holdings of a minor in England are treated by English courts as being held in trust. For example (under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996) if a minor enters into a tenancy agreement with a landlord and only the minor is a named as tenant, the landlord is treated as the de facto trustee. The upshot being, sorry, but I don't think the requested rewrite is the right way to go, as the way you say it reads is exactly how I think the law works. If you are a lawyer and know different, I'd be happy to defer. Jonh333 (talk) 17:57, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Coins through table

Yes I do... I will reference that better source shortly --Kingdamian1 (talk) 13:35, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Done --Kingdamian1 (talk) 18:46, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

There is yet a better source [1]... But I am afraid that it might be unethical to use it... Since the source is a direct video... Which then would make the trick available to others for free Kingdamian1 (talk) 20:19, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Kingdamian1, Wikipedia exists to make knowledge available to others for free. So far as Wikipedia is concerned the main problem with the dailymotion video as a source is that it appears to be a copyright violation. Cabayi (talk) 20:31, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Ok... Done... I did it! Provided a better source! --Kingdamian1 (talk) 20:44, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Kingdamian1, It feels wrong to be stripping links from a reference but I think in this case you're right. You might find the following useful:

• Wikipedia:Citing sources#Repeated citations
• Wikipedia:ProveIt
• Wikipedia:Refill

Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 06:21, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

BUT I DID NOT DO THAT! I copied it from here [2] --Kingdamian1 (talk) 15:06, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Methods

Also, I PURPOSELY DID NOT add the method section. I am not a pro magician, but I do NOT think it is ethical for me to reveal how the trick is done, even thought there are references --Kingdamian1 (talk) 18:31, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

I'm not bothered about the "magical ethics" but WP:NOTHOWTO applies. Cabayi (talk) 18:44, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Dearham

What I wrote about Dearham was an integral part of it's history especially the piece about the two mining companies, what is wrong with listing all of the old pubs that have now closed?

Also regarding the notable people there are quite a few articles backing up what I said.

http://www.timesandstar.co.uk/news/people/MBE-for-Boys-Brigade-leader-bafd01c3-041d-44b8-89f7-a0bba29dfc59-ds

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Guiy de Montfort (talk • contribs) 16:01, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Guiy de Montfort, How about citing those reliable, verifiable, independent references rather than keeping them to yourself? A Boys Brigade leader with an MBE isn't going to be notable on that basis alone. Has he done something else which would make him notable?

Please don't top-post. Start new topics at the bottom of the talk page. And please sign your talk page contributions with 4 tildes, ~~~~. Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 16:17, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Langevin family

Hello Cabayi, About the page on Langevin family I created yesterday, there are no self-published sources, except for my website on note 23. I found the other 22 references online. I just translated in english the family genealogy tree and the names of the references I found on the web. You can check the informations one by one to make sure the references are valuable. But if you still think I gave false or self-published informations, you can eventually delete the article. I don't think this page is totally objective but I try to remain the more objective possible. However, the sources are on french websites, maybe english wikipedia would select sources on english websites. Kind regards, Paul-Eric Langevin (talk) 09:45, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Paul-Eric Langevin, You're clearly here to eulogise your ancestors, not to build an encyclopedia, and you're blind to the extent of your conflict of interest - "there are no self-published sources, except for my website". Geneanet.org & koechlin.net are user generated and not reliable. Cabayi (talk) 11:10, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Cabayi, I did not modify any website I give in reference, neither geneanet.org nor koechlin.net. But you can delete these references if you prefer to. Your comments about "eulogising the ancestors" and so on are really strange. I just mention historical or biographical facts about the people more or less linked to my family, that played a role in a discipline or another. But I wrote a lot of pages that are not at all linked to my family and have nothing in common. My purpose is not to do some advertisement, especially in an encyclopedy, but to do some work of transmission for people who are interested in these subjects.I guess there is no conflict of interest about this, neither eulogising manner. I don't mention any imaginary fact or any fiction, just historical facts and references. But it is important that these facts and references must be verified by some other contributors to make sure it is fully correct. Kind regards, Paul-Eric Langevin (talk) 17:45, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Croa8man

Hi! I saw your note on ELIX Polymers. This is an odd case - the reason I didn't tag with a sockmaster is that the main attempt that I'm aware of to find the master was in 2015 with Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ntiele/Archive, which went pear shaped and no master was identified. User:Ntiele is probably the oldest known account, but it is unlikely to have been the first. - Bilby (talk) 15:39, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Bilby for explaining. Cabayi (talk) 06:13, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Praneeth Rao Article MPSE

Hi Sir its Micheal from MPSE (Motion pitures Sound Editors ) he worked for us lot of the movies as freelance and most server connected through team viewer and getting to studio helping us worked for film in hollywood and nation geographic channel , Tv season shows too , his really talented he works on to Biggest sound edtitors Guild ( ADR , Foley , SOund design ) Recroding Session ) Film SCoring ) in US and Uk of our branches and in NYC because as u let me knew have less records on to ur profile u had done big stuff working with warner bros sound , pinewood studios , sony pitures sound , skywalker sound , lipsync , sound dogs , etc but he had worked greatest short films and tv shows academy awards nominated person plus this time EMMY openings and he was nominated too and now am looking to post the same deleted biography which was previously deleted praneeth Rao

This was done by MPSE studio , Micheal not by himself we had to post his profile for the which he had done a great stuffs for us and for the team because previously i had a control of this account to help other taking articles so went with his name. my bad sorry .

--PraneAdword (talk) 11:00, 15 June 2018 (UTC)Micheal--PraneAdword (talk) 11:00, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Student soldiers in the Korean War

Hi there... the author has now just gone ahead and re-created the article you moved to Draft. I think technically this is not an A10?! _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 16:19, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Jake Brockman Thanks for the heads-up. Neither version has been speediable. The author's WP:CIR problems don't affect the article. I see no way forward but to tag its faults, mark it for the relevant projects, and hope that someone, somewhere understands what he's on about. Cabayi (talk) 17:35, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined

I have declined your speedy deletion nomination of Reports Afrique. While the article is in bad shape, the language is not bad enough for G11, and the claim of hosting the Africa Movie Academy Awards is enough for me to be uncomfortable with A7. I'd suggest taking this to AfD. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 15:33, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Vanamonde93, thanks for the heads-up. How about a G12? I don't see the need to put the community through the hassle of an AfD on Comrade Phils' / Philsville's business interests & self promotion (see founder in infobox). Cabayi (talk) 16:10, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Reply to Talk Page Message

Hi, I'm just pointing out an error that you left on my talk page. This error was when you said that Lordtobi told me no and I (according to you) claimed I didn't know what no meant. Well I was actually asking what it meant for a later revision which he fixed later on as he did not write clearly. This reply was him replying to me asking him whether something along the lines of 'during a takeover don't add sale to ________ pending' could be added to the template, to which he replyed.

'Is it a common error? Owner reflect current stands and parent is for "current and former" parents, which excludes possible future games, no?'

To which I replyed 'what are you on about by 'possible future games'? and what does the 'no' mean, is it a question or something? '

I asked what no meant here because he put a question mark after it.

and then Lordtobi replyed ' pardon, I wrote unclearly. Original statement fixed' And he fixed the statement to say 'Is it a common error? Owner reflect current stands and parent is for "current and former" parents, which excludes possible future parents, so I believe the exclusion is implicit and does not need to be stated explicitly.

Sorry if you did get confused when you did add state that on my talk page. But thats why I came to clear that up. Pepper Gaming (talk) 09:35, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Cleanup of Muslim Students Organization, Pakistan

I don't see what it is that still needs to be cleaned up on this article. Please advise. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 12:16, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Frayae, the page still hasn't been patrolled. I can't read the references given, so I'm not going to do it. I want it to be clear the whoever reviews the article that the author has a conflict of interest, which may inform their decision as to whether the article merits WP:A7, WP:G11, an WP:AFD for lack of notability, or passed as meeting Wikipedia's requirements. In the meantime, it doesn't hurt for the author to be aware that we're trying to build an encyclopedia not to provide him with an advertising platform. Regards, Cabayi (talk) 14:05, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Makes sense. I have been trying to keep J.abbasi313 from adding his "mission statement" to the article. J.abbasi313 is simply translating content from ur:مسلم_اسٹوڈنٹس_آرگنائزیشن_پاکستان, which is wildly promotional, although this appears to be allowed on that Wikipedia edition since the other editors involved in that article since it was created in 2017 have not complained. I took the banner to mean there was something else unsatisfactory about the article content and didn't consider the reviewers. There is is a limited amount more sourcing available in Google, but what's currently in the article is:

• source 1 is a report on a demand by the MSO to the Pakistani government, it briefly outlines the organizations purpose.
• source 2 is a brief news report on an anti-America rally the organisation held, it chiefly focuses on ideological issues.
• source 3 is a very short article explaining that the MSO has complained about a rights issue in Burma (the Rohingya crisis) and organised a number of protests.
• source 4 just says "Muslim Students Organization organize protest against US president Drumpf in response to his stance against the people of Pakistan" (where people of Pakistan equates to Muslims).

If this helps at all. Other sources available are chiefly the same, the organisation does a lot of protest rallies. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 14:42, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Deletion of And No Quarter

You've advised me that the criteria are applied consistently. I'm happy to accept that but I would appreciate clarification in the interests of saving time in future. I realise this requires work but then I spent three or four hours writing it so I'm entitled to a few minutes of yours.

Specifically, you explained this article does not pass the Notability test because it (a) provides references only for the historical events that it relates to and that (b) saying it provides a good overview of Walsh's themes as an author as well as insights into why he fell out of fashion is original research and thus disqualifies it. But that these are not true of the article on Mackenzie's 'Whiskey Galore.'

Bearing in mind the notability criteria, can you explain to me the differences between this article and that on Whiskey Galore? Because I'm struggling and I want to make sure I understand for future reference, since the only difference I can see is some additional detail on the book's adaptation for the stage.

Robinvp11 (talk) 16:26, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Robinvp11, there's a few points and misconceptions to pick apart there...

I don't think I've ever claimed that anything is ever applied consistently on Wikipedia. In an ideal world it would be so, but Wikipedia is a volunteer community, and things get dealt with by whoever comes across the matter first and thinks they have something to contribute.

On the volunteer community point, you're not entitled to any of my time, but on the other hand I'm happy to volunteer some.

Your question conflates the points about notability and original research. They are separate issues.

• Notability: The notability of books is assessed under WP:BOOKCRIT. Whisky Galore (novel) passes under

criterion 1 -"The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works", once in The Scotsman and another in The Stage both of which are reliable, verifiable, independent sources; and

criterion 3 - "The book has been considered by reliable sources to have made a significant contribution to a notable or significant motion picture" (twice over, for Whisky Galore! (1949 film) and Whisky Galore! (2016 film)).

And No Quarter, so far as I can see, and given the evidence you have provided, meets none of the criteria. The references you provided all relate to the historical events, not to the book itself.

• Original Research - you advanced the argument that the book offered insights. Either the insights are extracted in a reliable, verifiable, independent source (which should be cited, and which would be a point towards notability), or the insights are yours - which would be WP:OR.

While I have your attention, I'd recommend setting up archiving on your talk page. H:ARC Deleting talk page contents, while it's 100% ok (WP:OWNTALK), can create an impression that someone is trying to conceal something - especially when it's not your normal behaviour.

Regards, Cabayi (talk) 17:45, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Let’s reset; on reflection, I over-reacted, so my apologies for that. I think having one example of Walsh’s writing is useful but I probably haven’t made the case, so... I also believe there is a lack of consistency in application; that doesn’t change whether this article should be deleted but it is a source of frustration. There's not really a solution

I deleted the Talk Page stuff to stop me over-reacting and take a step back (hence this) but I take your point.

Robinvp11 (talk) 16:54, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Robinvp11, Yes, lets. Our discussion up until the reset isn't one of my better on-wiki interactions, for which I apologise. Hopefully you'll find the following a bit more constructive.

In the deletion discussion James500 added some sources which show the book's notability (so I've withdrawn the deletion nomination) and would fortify the article if added.

The article's categories included a couple of redlinks. I've replaced them with live categories but the mix of Irish author, Scottish setting, and English civil war looks odd & might be improved. Probably a new subcategory of Category:Wars of the Three Kingdoms and of Category:War novels by war would be appropriate.

The section, Historical background is carrying a double burden and would usefully be split. It's covering the background to the writing of the book (which is where I would expect to find the bulk of the article's notability), and to the book's plot.

I hope that this is a bit more useful & helpful for you. Regards, Cabayi (talk) 14:14, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, I'll take a look and update. This is a famous family story; my family is Irish and in the late 1950s while working near Inverness, my father went into a pub and was told by the landlord 'We don't serve murdering, thieving Irish here;' (or words to that effect). He specifically referenced Montrose's campaign, which is the subject of this book.

Robinvp11 (talk) 16:49, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Haywards Heath Building Society

The article Haywards Heath Building Society has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

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} 10:49, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Soft deletion is always fine by me, but the template does not allow for expressing preferences (it's up to the deleting admin). Now if we could find sources to demonstrate notability for other building societies, many are in an even worse referencing shape then this one was. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:18, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Flagged for Speedy Deletion

Hi there - I guess I'm a bit confused as to why the MoveIt Companies is being flagged for deletion. They are a company of note in Breda, IA, and I've provided various reliable sources. Perhaps you could help me improve the page or provide me with any suggestions? This aim of this article is to aid other small businesses in creating their own environmentally-friendly business plans. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Captaintrouble (talk • contribs) 20:16, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

It's the company that needs fixing, not the article. The company is simply not notable under Wikipedia's criteria - WP:NCORP. Also, it's pretty clear, from your contributions & talk page, that your only interest over the last 10 years has been to publicise the company. Cabayi (talk) 20:28, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Tu che le vanita

Hi Cabayi:

Thanks for moving my article to draft, but the idea was that others would help too. I also note that several articles about arias have no refs. The reason for this is the same as the reason many plot- and synopsis- sections in articles about movies, operas, plays, and novels have no refs--the work itself is considered to be the ref in those cases. HandsomeMrToad (talk) 15:29, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

HandsomeMrToad, I don't dispute what you say, but those aren't the points I was acting on.

• "the idea was that others would help" - I tagged the article's talk page with {{WP Opera}} to garner that help.
• "many plot- and synopsis- sections ... have no refs" - Is the Sentiment section the synopsis? I'll accept that "the work itself is considered to be the ref" but even that would imply a ref which points to the libretto, preferably a copy with an English translation.

The point which prompted the move to draft was a total lack of any refs to establish the notability of this aria. Why is this aria more notable than Io la vidi from the first act? The arias which have articles which I have looked at (Anvil Chorus & Nessun dorma) are both well sourced. A free pass on sourcing the synopsis doesn't translate to allowing totally unsourced articles. I hope you understand my reasoning. Cabayi (talk) 16:39, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I understand your point about sourcing the notability and the fact that it's popular and often used in auditions; as it stands, that might get dinged as OR. Let me point out that it's certainly TRUE, all you have to do is look at how many renditions of the aria are posted on YouTube. But I understand that truth is not enough at Wikipedia, OR, even correct OR, is not allowed. OK, I'll try to find some sources soon. Thank you, HandsomeMrToad (talk) 17:50, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

UPDATE: OK I've added some refs but I'm not sure whether or not they meet WP's criteria for good refs. To support that the aria is often featured in recitals and anthologies, I've linked to several reviews of recitals and anthologies by famous sopranos like Callas and Steber and others, which include it. To support that it's often used in auditions I linked to a site which tracks how often various arias are used. And I have linked to a general discussion of the sense of the aria (in Italian) to support my description of the various emotions it expresses.

I hope these are good enough to justify returning the article to active-status. If not, let me know and I'll try to do better. Thanks! HandsomeMrToad (talk) 06:33, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

HandsomeMrToad, Looks like it now meets the requirements. I've added some links which may need checking - the Bel Canto article states "It was overtaken by a heavier, more ardent, less embroidered approach to singing that was necessary in order to perform the innovative works of Giuseppe Verdi" which seems contrary to your text.

I've moved it back to mainspace where you can continue to work on it. Regards, Cabayi (talk) 07:15, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

User:Cabayi have you noticed the external links section of that article and the links to three youtube videos? Is that okay? WP:EL says " Linking to a page that illegally distributes someone else's work casts a bad light on Wikipedia and its editors. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as Scribd, WikiLeaks, or YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates copyright....Many videos hosted on YouTube or similar sites do not meet the standards for inclusion in External links sections, and copyright is of particular concern. Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations and should not be linked, either in the article or in citations. Links should be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis." I would be very surprised if at least the one with Fiamma Izzo d'Amico conducted by Karajan is not in copyright. I don't want to take away anyone's pleasure in adding links to great performances but I don't understand why if it is OK to do that every article on music doesn't have a lot of youtube links. Also youtube is very unstable, things come and go off there all the time and WP articles are permanent. Just asking, thanks for your help.Smeat75 (talk) 11:32, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

You're probably right. In as much as copyright crossed my mind it was that copyright in the composition is long out of date, I don't think I considered copyright in the performance. Cabayi (talk) 12:17, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Topic - speedy deletion

Hi Cabayi, You marked my page for speedy deletion, and said that my claim that I make unpaid edits for my clients does not hold water. I think you have misunderstood. I make unpaid edits for pages on Wikipedia. However, in some cases, such as this one, I am being paid in order to assist this educational institution (Foundation for Professional Development) to create a Wiki page. They are a registered university, but do not have the experience in creating their own page and therefore asked me to assist. I have no further relationship with them. There are other universities with Wikipedia pages, and they only want a similar page. The reason why they have asked me to help them, is because they want to make sure that their page is similar to pages for other universities and colleges, and is not seen as a promotion for their institution. As a freelance writer, I am often asked to help people with writing, or English (this is a multi-lingual country), or with some aspect of publishing, or communication consulting. The information that I have therefore loaded on the page is exactly the same kind of information that other colleges provide. I know that it needs for info, such as the university logo, the student demographics, the chancellor, the alumni, the faculties, etc. That will all come later. Please let me know if you have an issue with this. Niki Moore (talk) 10:44, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Niki Moore, Thanks for clarifying that you wrote The Foundation for Professional Development because you were paid to do so. That is a clear violation of Wikipedia's terms of use. It doesn't matter that the organisation is a not-for-profit.

No matter how well or how neutrally you write, the fact remains that you only find the foundation to be notable enough for an article because they've paid you to do so. That you've only been able to cite the foundation's own website as a source just amplifies their non-notability. Cabayi (talk) 11:05, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Cabayi, ok, I take your point. However, this is a registered educational institution, just like all other other South African universities and colleges that are listed on Wikipedia (not to mention colleges and universities in other countries). So, how would they have managed to load their pages on Wikipedia? Their pages were most certainly not made by disinterested outsiders, they were definitely written and edited by staff - that is obvious from the content. Yes, the only external source is the foundation's own website (you deleted the other one), but there are internal links (to other Wiki pages) and I am busy sourcing other external sources. This really is a genuine university. What must I do to make this right? Is it simply a case of a lack of verifiable links and sources? Niki Moore (talk) 12:03, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Niki Moore, You're continuing to try and create an article for which you've been paid, so you obviously don't take my point. And so long as you view articles about institutions as their pages rather than neutral encyclopedia articles about them you're going to run into problems.

I'm curious how you think I deleted a website?

"This really is a genuine university." - University of the Free State is a genuine university. The Foundation for Professional Development is paying you to spam Wikipedia.

If you're convinced there's something wrong with other articles, fix them. Cabayi (talk) 12:18, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Response to your message (Gabrielian)

Hello! Thank you for the help and clarification! I am resolving the issues with the external links right now and already gone through the use of first names issue. I have a question regarding something you wrote: "You've unnecessarily spun the article out into two pages, Eleonora Gabrielian & List of plants discovered by Eleonora Gabrielian."

From what i read, such long lists (like the one in the dedicated list page here), are not allowed inside articles and are usually stored in dedicated list pages (something to do with the article having to be printable without hidden information).

It is very difficult for me (as a new user) to keep track of all of the regulations, rules and conventions which Wikipedia holds, so i would appreciate if you could elaborate on how to resolve this issue, and if there is any way for me to keep the entire list of plants somehow.

Thank you for your help, this is extremely helpful to me! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabrielian (talk • contribs) 15:47, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Kishan Dewasi Hariyali

I saw your request to salt this title, but I have indef blocked the creator instead. Given there have been no edits from this user anywhere that are not self-promotion, I have no confidence they will edit about anything else anywhere. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:04, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Ritchie333, thanks for doing the block. Given that he's already created User:Kish, I worry that leaving the title unsalted will only tempt him to try sockpuppetry. Time will tell. Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 11:13, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Cannabis notice

I forgot to specify how the warning would look like. I think it would be hardly noticed in its current standard form. What about slightly increasing the font size and adding a header and an image?

Current form

My proposal

- Alumnum (talk) 10:23, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

I've done the image & header. Let's wait a while and see how effective it is before getting shouty & supersized. Please keep the requests together at Template talk:Editnotices/Page/Legality of cannabis where other editors can chip in with their opinions. Cabayi (talk) 10:41, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks. - Alumnum (talk) 05:53, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

MroPrashant

Hi Cabayi,

I am new to Wikipedia and trying to learn it. I don't know the guidelines. I just share the information which I think is useful. All of my edits contains right and verified sources. I am not a professional writer but I have created the wikipedia article for which I didn't even get paid. It was the information of one of the organization for which I am working. I got the content and I tried to create a page. Let me know what guidelines I am suppose to follow in order to share the organization information.MroPrashant (talk) 08:41, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

MroPrashant, "It was the information of one of the organization for which I am working." - then you have a conflict of interest. Please do NOT edit articles about your employer.

I see you didn't receive the usual welcome message which explains Wikipedia's key policies when you started editing. I'll add that to your talk page. Cabayi (talk) 08:53, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Topic - reply to message

Hello, Yes I would like to see an article created for John Files Tom. I would be happy to provide more information on him. I did not plan to leave it with that little amount of information, but I am new at this. The Obituary is from the Galveston Daily News April 2, 1906 page 5. --Devinpipes (talk) 16:10, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of RajatSubhra Majumdar

Please restore the page. I have added the authentic references and there is no promotional content. I have gone through the deletion discussion page of the topic. previously it was nominated for deletion as there is some image content which is identified as copyrighted content and some links and references included with promotional purpose. I have created the page freshly with authentic references with no promotional intention. requesting you to restore the page.Aparajita Majumdar (talk) 11:26, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

You have a conflict of interest. Cabayi (talk) 19:26, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Deletion of Nur Restaurant

Hello Cabayi,

I would love the opportunity to salvage the hard work I put into making the page for Nur Restaurant. I had no idea about the conflict of interest rules and in no way intended to promote the restaurant by creating a factual wiki page. I understand there are guidelines to protect the integrity of the wiki community and I am happy to abide. I would ask that you reinstate the page to a draft so I can save the information for later and correct usage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlesAccivatti (talk • contribs) 22:38, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

You have a conflict of interest. Cabayi (talk) 08:26, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of article on Charmee

Hi. I put up an article on a musician by name Charmee and it was tagged for speedy deletion. I know the information provided was insufficient and may seem not notable but I appeal that if I can get the write up and possibly an advice on how to make it better. I am new to this and was testing to see how it works. The said musician is a newbie who is making waves here in Africa. Kindly consider my appeal.

Toscar Roberts (talk) 16:27, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Toscar Roberts Creating an article straight into mainspace is incredibly difficult, and has become a lot harder since you last tried a few years ago.

• Read WP:MUSICBIO. Does Charmee meet the requirements? Describing him as a "newbie" doesn't sound promising. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia which records people & things which are already notable, it's not a tool to help make them notable.
• Start your article in draftspace at Draft:Charmee. If you start it with

{{subst:Biography}}

as your first edit you'll have the outline structure of a biography to work with. Then add

{{subst:AFC draft|Toscar Roberts}}

at the top, which helps you submit the article for review when you're ready. WP:BLP is strictly enforced nowadays - unless the biography is supported by reliable, verifiable, independent sources it won't survive long. Hope that helps, Good luck, Cabayi (talk) 17:17, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Article Deleted

Cabayi,

I would like the chance to recover the article I was still working on titled, "Kecak Dance Pura Dalem Taman Kaja".

The heading was and still is in the Requested Articles page of wikipedia. I have provided a screenshot of this.

I would like the opportunity to minimise the general content of my article which has overlap with the "Kecak" article. I was attempting to background what the tale of the whole dance was in general.

My article, as you can see from the title, differs from the general South Asian "Kecak" dance that is spoken about in the "Kecak" article. My article goes specifically to another 'artery' of the dance, more specifically, the one entwined in Balinese culture and goes to one location which is a tourism destination for the dance. I was still yet to entwine the very specifics of the schedule. But my article did outline the location of Ubud which is the cultural heart of Bali in Indonesia and spoke of the "Pura Dalem", which is the specific temple it is performed in.

In no way can the general "Kecak" article be as narrowed to Ubud in Bali and how the "Taman Kaja" community conduct the performance.

The tale is very identical, but once again, has a Balinese significance to it with the inclusion of the Indonesian Garuda bird etc.

I would like the chance to narrow in further on the temple in Ubud, which is the venue, and the tourism generated and how it can be watched for the article which would differ to the general Kecak dance which has a Thai and Cambodian reference to it. This is different to that.

On this page https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Wikipedia:Requested_articles/Arts_and_entertainment#Recreation_and_hobbies

(Kecak Fire & Trance Dance by Taman Kaje Community, Ubud - Bali)Jthr5091 (talk) 06:39, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Jthr5091, You need to be careful at WP:RA. Not every article requested is a topic meriting a wikipedia article. Not everybody is who or what they seem. This request:

• Kecak Dance Pura Dalem Taman Kaje (agungresortubud.com/service/kecak-dance/) - Kecak Fire & Trance Dance by Taman Kaje Community, Ubud - Bali.

was added by an unregistered editor (not necessarily a problem) who has not edited before or since, not on any wiki project. It's obvious that whoever made the request has no idea of Wikipedia's policies. They have no idea of what is notable enough for our purposes.

The request is supported by a URL (good), which turns out to be a hotel's website advertising local tourist attractions (bad). The webpage's prominent floating buttons for "Hotel Reservation Chat" and "Online Booking" should have been red flags to you.

So, the bad news, I feel that you've been played as a cat's paw by whoever made the request, and wanted to advertise on Wikipedia.

I note that your edits occur at 7 day intervals - I presume you're enrolled on a course which is encouraging you to use Wikipedia. They're obviously teaching the technical stuff, are they not teaching any of the policies which Wikipedia uses to try and keep itself reliable and free of adverts?

Your description of how Kecak Dance Pura Dalem Taman Kaje is more "Balinese" than that described in Kecak - despite Bali appearing 33 times in that article and the theme being entirely Balinese - makes no sense. Your description of how you plan on expanding the article hovers dangerously close to original research. We need reliable, verifiable, independent sources for facts in articles. We don't allow opinion.

Your efforts would be better spent in expanding Kecak or voy:Ubud#Cultural performances than starting a new article from scratch. Cabayi (talk) 09:25, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: HiDeep

Hello Cabayi. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of HiDeep, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: claims significance, text is (no longer) promotional; take it to WP:AFD. Thank you. SoWhy 15:14, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Special:NewPages vs Special:NewPagesFeed

If I understand you correctly with regards to your Oppose, you are concerned that this will lead to editors who patrol via Special:NewPages repeatedly clicking on 'nominated for deletion' articles thinking they are unreviewed? If this passes, both the Page Curation toolbar and Twinkle will be modified to no longer automatically review/patrol articles when CSDed/PRODed. This would leave these pages 'yellow' in Special:NewPages which might indeed be anoying to users that patrol there.

What is it about Special:NewPagesFeed that makes you not want to move from Special:NewPages? How many of these editors are there? What can we do to fix these issues? Special:NewPagesFeed has much more powerful sorting tools available (especially with recent updates, and especially with the other proposed updates), and there is a large advantage of not letting pages fall through the cracks with single points of failure (as the current CSD/PROD system endangers). To me this far outweighs the few editors that insist on not moving over to the new system, but I'm willing to discuss it with you if you can give me a bit of info and insight. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 14:22, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

I've proposed an additional change that should address this issue over at the NPR discussion page (un-highlighting articles that are 'nominated for deletion' at Special:NewPages, even if unreviewed). — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 14:49, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Insertcleverphrasehere - That started off looking so open minded, and then mid post you switched from a neutral question "How many of these editors are there?" to a more dismissive presumption, "the few editors that insist on not moving over to the new system". What happened?

"the editors who are not impressed by the new system" would be a fairer statement of the situation.

• On my screen, NPF shows 3 or 4 articles at once, NP shows 17 or 18.
• NPF overrides the browser's "visited" colour change, concealing my previous encounter with the title. With NP I can see which pages I've visited before and pick up on the article's recreation, its potential weaknesses still remaining from its previous version, look for previous AfDs (potential G4), or if different authors are involved potential sockpuppetry & G5.

To a lesser extent, I prefer using one tool for all my reactions to the new article, whether it's CSD, PROD, AFD, or beyond the toolset of curation, AIV, UAA, SPI...

On a more strategic level, a monoculture approach to patrolling/reviewing invites blindspots. A diverse approach with a multitude of tools offers more ways to approach the review and fewer cracks for material to fall through. Cabayi (talk) 22:32, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Ok. That sounds like solid reasoning, especially the last bit. Does my proposed simultaneous change to Special:NewPages solve the issue that you would otherwise have? — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 07:24, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Using only one account

I am using only one account I have not any other account. Kashmirwikihub (talk) 13:54, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Ubon Kids City F.C. have update for old pages. Do you see this page update ?

Ubon Kids City F.C. play in 2018 Thai FA Cup. It is national cup of Thailand. It doesn't fail [7] Aquaelfin 19:03, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Aquaelfin - Oops, I missed the "R1". Sorry. Anything to add to the other amateur football teams you've created articles for? Cabayi (talk) 13:06, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Cup qualifying rounds

Hi! I reverted your good faith edit on the football club notability page as after the ongoing Thai amateur team purge, there's not really consensus around qualifying rounds for cups granting notability. SportingFlyer talk 12:08, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

SportingFlyer And yet I had my head chewed off for taking that viewpoint at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centenary Stormers FC. Which is it? Or are the guidelines not worth the pixels they're written on? Cabayi (talk) 12:43, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

I talk Gunkiet only. It's not public

I don't add Thai language to Official webpage. I talk author who add 2018 Thai League Cup to wrong some part of it such as football players name. I am thai and Gunkiet too. I talk thai language because more understand than other language. Do you know "talk" word ? I don't talk to you and other person. I and Gunkiet only. Aquaelfin (talk) 15:54, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Aquaelfin, Wikipedia is a collaborative project where we all work together, not in private. Do you know "collaboration" word? Cabayi (talk) 16:06, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Aquaelfin: Your talk page is not private it is public anyone can access it and read it and up to a certain point edit it (as I am doing here...). As per WP:SPEAKENGLISH you must communicate in English or provide a translation. If you wish to communicate just in Thai you can use email to each other but on your English wikipedia talk page you must communicate in English. I believe I have already reminded you of this once already. --Dom from Paris (talk) 16:10, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Ranks in taxonomy templates

Hi, just to note that in taxonomy templates, like Template:Taxonomy/Caridea, the ranks must be the Latin term, not the English. The system may appear to work if you use the English term, but some features don't. There's a sortable list of ranks at WP:Autotaxobox/ranks. Peter coxhead (talk) 18:54, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Peter coxhead thanks for the pointer. I was just trying to get the {{speciesbox}} in Caridina apodosis to work & pulled the intermediate classifications - and their ranks - from wikidata. It didn't occur to me that it would be incorrect. Cabayi (talk) 19:19, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

No, it's quite reasonable that it wouldn't! Ideally the system would fix itself, but this is tricky to implement. Peter coxhead (talk) 22:44, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Peter coxhead, I may be missing something, but you've pointed me at a list of matched English & Latin terms, which will be found in the |rank= parameter of {{Speciesbox}}. It seems like a very straightforward bot-job to replace the English terms with the Latin equivalents. Expecting folks to use Latin inputs to produce English outputs, and not copy the English output from sister species when creating a species box, well... Cabayi (talk) 10:35, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by "sister species" above. If you copy an existing functioning taxobox or taxonomy template it will have the right values for ranks.

Latin terms are not just used as parameters in {{Speciesbox}} but throughout all the code that implements manual and automated taxoboxes, both template code and Lua modules. There are hundreds of thousands of templates plus modules that use and expect Latin terms, which have been in use since an October 2005 revision of {{Taxobox}}. Changing all the code and maintaining its functionality is not something that could be done by a bot. Furthermore, editors who work with taxoboxes are very used to using Latin terms. Would I have designed the system this way in 2005? Probably not, but changing 13 years later after the system has grown enormously would be a massive task! Peter coxhead (talk) 10:52, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Peter coxhead, I think you misread my suggestion. I didn't suggest a bot to translate Latin to English (to "fix" the system), I suggested it should translate |rank= English word to |rank= Latin equivalent so you wouldn't have to chase around correcting users like me.

By "sister species" I meant one of the same genus. For Caridina apodosis I found Caridina nilotica which doesn't use the automatic system, so I had to create the intermediate levels (using Parent taxon on wikidata) 'til my bit of the tree connected to an existing bit of the hierarchy. Cabayi (talk) 21:05, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Ah, right, I see now. Actually it's pretty easy to monitor the error-checking category, but a bot is an interesting idea.

Just a warning to be cautious about Wikidata and classification. It can be useful, but firstly, Wikidata tries to represent all taxonomic views, so can have multiple names and classifications, and secondly, there are many fewer editors there, so it's often not as up-to-date. Peter coxhead (talk) 21:15, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Multiple users spotted - clarification

Discussion consilidated at User talk:Sarath N Shyamala#November 2018 Cabayi (talk) 10:35, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Request

Hi, I have finished work on article Alliance School in Tehran (مدرسه آلیانس تهران) that you have moved to draft. Thank you for directing me to improve my article. This article exists in Wikipedia in Persian language and this is a direct translation of it. Please check and kindly let me know if there is anything else I have to do, and if there is not I appreciate if you take it out of the draft, six weeks is a long time. Don’t make me wait that long. Thank you. Alex-h (talk) 11:12, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

I tagged the draft for 3 interested projects. Hopefully they may be able to offer you some help, and to polish up the English.

You start off talking about two entities, “Alliance France” and “Alliance Israelite universelle”, but then refer to Alliance as if there were only one Alliance. It's confusing. Could you clarify?

You mention Naser al-Din Shah Qajar but don't link to him. You also refer to him inconsistently with a mix of spacing, dashes, mdashes through his name. Be consistent.

Hope that helps, Cabayi (talk) 11:42, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello again,with thanks for your guidance, I have done the 3 points you required. If possible, please take it out of the draft.Thank you. Alex-h (talk) 21:14, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Xolani Sotashe

Hi, there! I believe that the article, Xolani Sotashe, should not be deleted. Please read my explanation:

I created the article and placed an "in use" template at the top of the article to help avoid edit conflicts. I intended to significantly grow the article to such a point by adding information and citing sources. I then got a message stating the article had become a draft. I continued editing the article until, eventually, I got message, from you, saying that the article had been nominated for speedy deletion, because there was two versions of the article (the "original" one and the second "draft" one). The two editors, who placed the separate messages, did not consult with me, leading to this unfortunate situation. The article should not be deleted since it is about a local politician. I do hope that the "draft" version of the article is removed and all the content from that specific article is moved this article.

Thanks.

Lefcentreright (talk) 13:57, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

I believe what you actually want is in fact:

• Xolani Sotashe should be deleted;
• Draft:Xolani Sotashe should be reviewed, eventually leading to it being accepted, and then moved to Xolani Sotashe.

CASSIOPEIA moved the article to Draft at 11:38, and you (I guess because you were already working on your next edit) re-created it at 11:41. The version CASSIOPEIA moved had no references at that time - and given the requirements for biographies of living people - moving the article was the most accommodating action available. When you recreated it, I couldn't move it (because the draft already existed) so deletion is the only option available.

I don't know enough about South African politics to know whether being party leader on a city council is significant enough to meet the notability requirements. WP:NPOL calls for "Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage". I'm not convinced that being runner-up for mayor, and the coverage you've provided, meets the requirements. I'll tag the draft's talk page with the relevant projects to see if they can help.

In any case, Xolani Sotashe needs to be deleted in order to make way for Draft:Xolani Sotashe to eventually be moved to mainspace. Cabayi (talk) 15:48, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

I corrected the reason for the speedy nomination. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:56, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Template:Sovereign states of Europe

How would

be added to the bottom of this template? —Eli355 (talk • contribs) 00:54, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Eli355, Carefully ;-)

At {{Sovereign states of Europe}} scroll to the bottom to the line:

Editors can experiment in this template's sandbox (edit | diff) and testcases (create) pages.

Check the diff to make sure the sandbox is a copy of the live template before you start working on it. Refresh the copy if it isn't. Edit away. There's already a |below= in the template so you'll have to get the two bits of text to sit together harmoniously.

Create the testcases to show live & sandboxes together for comparison.

Once you're happy with the result raise a request on the talk page {{Edit template-protected|ans=no}} copy it from the sandbox to the live template.

Make a note of the change. Semi-protected templates don't officially count towards WP:TPEGRANT, but they help paint the picture that you know what you're doing, and doing it cautiously. Hope that helps, but let me know if I've misread your question, Cabayi (talk) 19:02, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

I added this line to the template, and why do you mention WP:TPEGRANT here? —Eli355 (talk • contribs) 21:48, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Eli355, If it means nothing to you, forget that I mentioned it. Cabayi (talk) 09:01, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

About EasyRentCars

Respectable Cabayi, I noticed that you post speedy deletion templates for EasyRentCars. Its notability is high, and does not meet the G11 and A7 standards. Thank you!PZOOPP.Fhristian (talk) 10:04, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

John Clarence Lincoln

Hello Cabayi, can you please take a look at John Clarence Lincoln you nominated for deletion back in 2016 under John Lincoln (telecommunications) (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Lincoln (telecommunications)). Thank you – GSS (talk|c|em) 03:17, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

GSS, good catch. I've tagged the article G4. First thoughts - The author looks like a sock of Caroline A. Murphy (SPI now at Rudra.shukla), as does an SPA editor, Navaidasolutions. Over a year later they're stale but it may be worth filing a pro-forma SPI & tagging one of Lisa's creations G5. Cabayi (talk) 07:36, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

GSS, SPI filed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rudra.shukla. Please pile on in if you think I've missed something. Cabayi (talk) 09:43, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

I was comparing both editors (the author and Caroline A. Murphy) this morning and to me they looked the same based on the use of edit summary so will add my comment at the SPI soon. Thank you – GSS (talk|c|em) 09:48, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kirsten Nimwey

Hello! How many commercial publishers you can court mostly writing in Tagalog if your book is not a localization of the Bible, or a handbook for schools supported by the government, or like that? There are a Wikia page of the The Explorers universe and regular illustrative work on the Mr. Mac Bible series for years to be kind of notable too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pr12402 (talk • contribs) 05:06, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Cre8 Music Academy Wikipedia page tagged a page for deletion

Hello, I just saw that there was a speedy deletion tag added to the wiki page I created. I've gone through the tutorials and articles you provided, but I still don't understand what is wrong with the page. I based the wiki page off of this wiki page: https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Colburn_School. I tried to fit the structure as best as I could. So I'm wondering, why is mine being deleted? Do you need more references added about the school? Or do you need more factual sections about the school? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CelticsFan203 (talk • contribs) 00:26, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

CelticsFan203, You were asked on your talk page whether you have a conflict of interest. Please deal with that issue first. Cabayi (talk) 09:38, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Cabayi, The conflict of interest issue has been dealt with, now what is needed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CelticsFan203 (talk • contribs) 21:45, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

CelticsFan203, I see no evidence in your contributions that you've done anything to deal with the conflict of interest issue.

Also, you don't need to ping anybody on their own talk page, and pinging only works if you sign the post ~~~~ in the same edit. Cabayi (talk) 13:27, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Amar Nath Grover or Justice A. N. Grover moved to draftspace

Thanks for reviewing the article. Query 1 Should I remove all the external links from the article? Query 2 If I remove all the external links then from where the facts will be refrenced? Kindly help. This is my first experience of publishing an article on wikipedia. (Ikkumpal (talk) 12:43, 12 December 2018 (UTC))

Ikkumpal - I'll be out for the next few hours and don't have much time. If the external links are useful for supporting facts in the article put them in references. WP:IC. The quickest way to get it right is to use WP:ProveIt. You can just put in the references URL and it'll put a well formatted citation into your article.

Starting off your wiki experience by creating a new article is tough, very tough. Unlike many new editors you've chosen a notable subject, and made a good unbiased start. Feel free to leave questions here. Hope that helps, Cabayi (talk) 13:02, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Request

Hello Cabayi, It was nice of you cleaning off my article "Alliance School in Tehran". I wonder if you could provide me with the tools for citation and other improvements for my future articles.Thank you. Alex-h (talk) 21:14, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Alex-h, the changes I made there were just me, no tools. I would recommend WP:ProveIt and WP:ReFill for references, and WP:HOTCAT for handling categories. Happy editing, Cabayi (talk) 21:27, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Deletion of Kinesis money

Thanks for your input, working with original author to get the page into better shape Ascv (talk) 12:37, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Also, I see there is a long way to go, so I moved it to draft and removing the deletion tag (seems this is what "This template is being used in the wrong namespace. To nominate this talk page for deletion, go to Miscellany for deletion." is advising.. ) I hope this is ok.. if not, do let me know how to proceed Ascv (talk) 13:08, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Ascv No, it's not OK. A deletion discussion runs until it reaches a conclusion. You can't duck out of it. A link to the relevant guidance (WP:EDITATAFD) was there in the template before you moved the article. If you have a point to make, make it in the discussion - though you ought to read Wikipedia:Guide to deletion before doing so. Cabayi (talk) 16:44, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I did read it, and it doesn't say not to move the article back to draft Ascv (talk) 13:18, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Ascv,

1. WP:EDITATAFD : "You should not turn the article into a redirect."

   Moving the article from mainspace to draft creates a redirect from mainspace to the draft.

2. WP:EDITATAFD : "You must not modify or remove the Articles for deletion notice (AfD notice)."

   You removed the deletion notice despite its instruction "Please do not remove or change this AfD message until the discussion has been closed".

Are you sure you read the guidance? Cabayi (talk) 13:37, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

REALLY sure. It's not obvious that turning an article back into a draft is considered a redirect - maybe you can improve that page and also re-read that one about being nice to newcomers. Ascv (talk) 23:54, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Ascv, You've been on wikipedia for over 7 years. How long do you expect to be regarded as a newcomer? Cabayi (talk) 09:00, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

I sarcastically applaud your logic and genuinely question your research skills. Who cares when I first started an account? Can you see how many actual edits or new pages I've made? Have a good day Ascv (talk) 03:07, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing Mamrukhi Church, Cabayi.

Unfortunately Onel5969 has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

Hi. Reverted your review due to a copyvio issue.

To reply, leave a comment on Onel5969's talk page.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:35, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Onel5969, Thanks for the notification. It seems a bit borderline to me. The version at az:Mamrux kilsəsi suggests there's more that could be said, and that it might be better if the offending sentence were removed and revdel'd. Anyhoo, I recall reviewing a couple of other short articles about churches in that part of the world on the same day. The author's other articles may need a second pair of eyes too. Cabayi (talk) 17:55, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks. Yes, I've been discussing the issue with him. You're right, I could have removed it and RevDel'd, but to be honest I was a bit burned out by that, having done about 20 or so today alone. I went back over all of his work, and there were about 10-15 which aside from the opening sentence were entirely lifted from that website. And you wouldn't have seen it using earwig, you had to actually go to the site, which is the only way I found it. The editor is working on removing the copyvio material, and putting notes on the talk pages for the admin to see the copyvio has been dealt with. I meant to come here and leave a more detailed message but got sidetracked by work.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:01, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the assist

I appreciate your feedback on my talk page. Thank you! Comatmebro (talk) 23:27, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Contesting speedy deletion of CMS (Chemotherapy Management System)

Hello,

I cannot see why the page CMS (Chemotherapy Management System) has been deleted. I have read the instructions ( Information about companies and products must be written in an objective and unbiased style, free of puffery. ). and must say I consider that I have complied to these.

I am a physician working currently as a project leader in Norway, trying to standardize chemotherapy treatment, with a current mandate to do this in the South-Eastern Health Authority of Norway. I noticed that there was no reference on the Internet to the system that we are implementing. I tried to write a short article about the system, unbiased, just to describe what it does, but of cause also with a reference to the provider's web page (just as a reference as to what this is all about) as well as a reference to the robot which is integrated to the system currently running at our hospital installation in Oslo.

My ambition, and what I'm working for in a more general perspective, is to strive for improvement thourough standardization of treatment for cancer chemotherapy, primarily in Scandinavia (as an example for the rest of the world), and starting with the largest region in Norway (comprising half of the Norwegian population) (South-Eastern Health Authority). We're establishing here a regional system for cancer chemotherapy, using CMS.

The wikipedia article was rather short, as a start, because I experienced when I tried to save the article after writing a couple of paragraphs, that my employer actually has blocked editing of mediawiki articles. So, I had to copy what I had written so far, and send it over to the cell phone and edit/save the current draft of my wikipedia article using my cellphone, which was not very easy.

Then, I left the rest of the work to later, but now my article has been speedy deleted. I consider this to be a mistake, since I have no commercial interest in this company, and CMS just happens to be the system that we are implementing in Norway. Many commercial products are described in wikipedia, but this is no kind of advertisement for this product. My intention was to inform, and it would further be to describe broader, using our current example and experience of how this system is being used in Norway - and furthermore, I would want to describe how other similar systems specializing in cancer chemotherapy could improve IT support for cancer treatments - as a general measure to increase patient safety by securing closed loop medication. So, this is an initiative to increase awareness of the need for such type of support for high-risk medical treatments, and it has absolutely no commercial focus.

So, please, would you put the article back in wikipedia, and I can continue to contribute to wikipedia as a constantly growing source of unbiased information for the public.

Yours sincerely,
Arne Westgaard, MD, PhD
Project leader,
Regional cancer chemotherapy project (MKB project)
Norwegian South-Eastern Health Authority — Preceding unsigned comment added by Westgaard (talk • contribs) 11:03, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Westgaard, I see you've recreated the article so this discussion is somewhat redundant. However, as guidance, I'll point to:

• "or One:MedicinesCMS (as currently presented by the company) " - what company? Are you writing about Chemotherapy management systems or just one company's implementation of it?
• A Google search for chemotherapy management software returns several systems, yet your article focuses solely on JAC. You may have no financial interest in JAC but you couldn't have done much better at favouring them over other software systems in this field if you had.
• Use reliable, verifiable, independent sources, cited inline, not just collected as external links at the end.
• If you want to work on the article, please start in draft at a neutral title, like Draft:Chemotherapy management systems. I see RHaworth has already moved it to Draft:Chemotherapy Management System Write about Chemotherapy management systems in general, not just the one you've purchased.

I applaud your work toward closed loop medication. I have friends trying to manage their diabetes with a closed loop setup. While you raise closed loop here, I don't see much mention of it in your article. I also support Wikipedia's objective of neutral point-of-view writing which does not explicitly or implicitly advertise a specific product. Hope that helps, Cabayi (talk) 12:15, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry tag

hello User:Cabayi, why will you think I am a sockpuppetry of another account by helping improve articles on Wikipedia?? The article Bird suites Wikipedia per its policies. We can invite more editors to help both of us on it. Please remove my tag now, I am not a sockpuppet. BeyondKontrol (talk) 11:40, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Read WP:MEAT and make your case at the investigation page. Cabayi (talk) 11:43, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Wish you a happy Christmas Alex-h (talk) 19:56, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Alex-h, I hope you and yours have a merry Christmas & a happy New Year too. Cabayi (talk) 20:09, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

	Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!
	Wishing you and your family a joyous Christmas and a happy and prosperous New Year! Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, GSS (talk

Thank you GSS, I hope you and yours also have a Merry Christmas and a happy New Year. Cabayi (talk) 10:33, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Bangkhuntien F.C. have public news record

Bangkhuntien F.C. was appeared in SMMTV Sport Channel. It is national sports news in thailand. https://www.google.com/search?q=SMMTV+Sport+Channel&oq=SMMTV+Sport+Channel&aqs=chrome..69i57j0.1060j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 Aquaelfin (talk) 5:15, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Nathan Crawford Barnett

Hello Cabayi. While I agree that a redirect of this article was appropriate (I didn't realize that a previous article existed), I think it would have been appropriate for you to contact me prior to the move, so that I could save my work. A simple examination of the edit history would have shown that I was actively involved in that process when you moved the article. Again, a simple heads up would have been a courtesy. Gulbenk (talk) 08:37, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Gulbenk, you're right. I'm sorry. Cabayi (talk) 09:06, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Bangkok City F.C. is differrent

Check reference before add CSD7. Bangkok City F.C. references isn't same Bangkhuntien F.C. Aquaelfin (talk) 11:18, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Checked - it's a youth team (not notable) with claims of what it will become (WP:CRYSTAL). Cabayi (talk) 11:25, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

This club has senior team to join T5 now. It doesn't youth team only. please check news detail. Aquaelfin (talk) 11:57, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

An amateur league. Cabayi (talk) 12:56, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Amateur league can create templates when have national public news. not all team of Amateur league can't create Aquaelfin (talk) 13:03, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

It doesn't spam. I think to discuss of Bangkok City F.C. Nomination. Don't use CSD A7. Use CSD A7 when create this templates again and don't deferrent old templates Aquaelfin (talk) 12:59, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

I don't understand. What template? Cabayi (talk) 13:27, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

template is wikipedia pages for each thing such as Bangkok Christian College F.C. is one template. Bangkok City F.C. is one teamplate.

plase use Bangkok City F.C. same nominated for deletion; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bangkhuntien F.C.. Aquaelfin (talk) 13:34, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Bangkok Christian College F.C. is an article.

{{db-club}} is a template.

Maybe a deletion discussion will be necessary if the speedy deletion doesn't happen. But nobody has contested the speedy deletion yet. Cabayi (talk) 13:42, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

File:2017-06-27 snip2.PNG listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:2017-06-27 snip2.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Snowycats (talk) 01:51, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

File:2017-06-27 snip1.PNG listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:2017-06-27 snip1.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Snowycats (talk) 01:51, 30 December 2018 (UTC)