User talk:Filelakeshoe/archive 2

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

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PROIV (2nd nomination)

I find your handling of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PROIV (2nd nomination) to be inappropriate and request you carefully analyze the situation. While it is unlikely a !supervote there is a marginal possibility or that. There is a serious matter here which probably requires taking to DRV; namely the raising of a second AfD within 24 hours of the closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PROIV by Daniel as no consensus and I see no evidence of Daniel being contacted over that matter. I believe re-opening is inappropriate and it is a DRV matter. Thankyou. 10:25, 16 September 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djm-leighpark (talk • contribs) .

I'm happy to reopen and relist the AfD, but if you think this is a DRV matter I suggest you open a DRV. Bear in mind a "no consensus" close doesn't rule out a further AfD, although I agree this was a bit soon. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 10:51, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Thankyou for that option to go to DRV. I shall raise the same as soon as I am reasonably able, it will probably be almost but I am in some crazy RL at the moment and if a local community response team are unable to source a commode I need to brave the Goodwood Festival of Speed to and the police speedtraps attempt to source one from West Sussex! Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 11:09, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Deletion review for PROIV

An editor has asked for a deletion review of PROIV. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Djm-leighpark (talk) 13:22, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

About Santosh Mahadik

Hi, @Filelakeshoe: Santosh Mahadik This article has already been removed, I moved this article to draft but the author of this article did not submit the draft and moved this article back to the article's crossname I searched on google about this article But did not get any important information, now if I enrolled it for AFD then I will have to face big problem.Best Regards Jiggyziz^Talk✍️ 10:23, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Jiggyziz:, I've moved it back to draft space. It doesn't qualify for A7 nor for G4, since the new article is sufficiently different to the one deleted in the 2017 AfD. User:Kumarsaikat, please submit the article for review rather than moving it to mainspace yourself. It still has rather serious WP:NPOV issues. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 10:41, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Filelakeshoe Thank you so much for this important action.Best Regards

Jiggyziz^Talk✍️ 10:48, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

For the record I don't think you would have faced any problems sending it to AfD - either it's decided the topic is notable based on the new sources, or it's still deemed non-notable and the title is salted. But having someone hitherto uninvolved review the draft is probably a better idea. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 10:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

filelakeshoe It can happen, but I think this article will have to be closely monitored so that the article does not take this article back to the article namespace.. Best Regards 11:11, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Wana write about a poet from Balochistan, Pakistan.

A poet named Rasheed Hasrat belongs to Balochistan Pakistan he has written a book named sookhe paton pe qadam and the second is awaiting publication so kindly respond me if you can poet it in The portion of list of urdu poets can you help me out writing about him? Thanks waiting for your kind response Asher Rasheed (talk) 07:52, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Asher, to be included on Wikipedia there need to be multiple independent sources discussing his work. These need not be in English. Previous articles on this person have been deleted because they didn't demonstrate this. If you think you can, I suggest you submit the article at WP:Articles for Creation. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 07:58, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Sufficient warning

With all due respect, If four warnings and two blocks (24h and 48h) are not sufficient warning, what is? Do you think another 4im is going to change anything for someone with this contribution list? Their MO is to choose a random article and vandalise it. --Muhandes (talk) 10:05, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

I just realized, this was range blocked before. Should I take it to ANI, or are you going to handle it? --Muhandes (talk) 10:08, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Muhandes: Thanks for linking the ANI thread, it's clearer now, I've blocked the IP for two weeks. I didn't want to reinstate the rangeblock as there are some contributions from other addresses which seem to be productive. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 10:23, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Actually, I've just noticed the ANI thread was already linked on the talk page, so sorry about that, this was my mistake. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 10:28, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

No problem, I didn't notice it either on my first read. Thanks for handling this. --Muhandes (talk) 11:24, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Request for blocking

Hello, may I ask you for help with fight against vandalism? I'm constantly reverting edits of someome who disrupts twin towns sections of various cities and municipalities and jumps between different IPs (178.143.50.74, 178.143.50.89, 193.87.63.204, 95.102.249.250). I'm not good at it so I just manually revert every edit one by one and it's exhausting. I notice you already reverted some edits of User talk:193.87.63.204 and wrote him. I tried to solve this through Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism which helped when I dealt with User talk:HunCzeLit224 and User talk:178.143.50.74 (both obviously same person as now) in April, but this time my request for blocking just disappeared without resolution. FromCzech (talk) 08:37, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

why did you remove the article of Joshua Oto?

(copypaste of article removed)

Hi @Addendum666:, I didn't delete the article, it was moved to draft space (Draft:Teruyoshi Joshua Oto) by User:Rugbyfan22 because he doesn't yet meet the Rugby union notability criteria. Once he actually makes an appearance for the first team you can update the article and move it back to mainspace. The page I deleted was just a redirect to the draft from article space which was left behind after the move. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 19:15, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

RfA 2021 review update

Thanks so much for participating in Phase 1 of the RfA 2021 review. 8 out of the 21 issues discussed were found to have consensus. Thanks to our closers of Phase 1, Primefac and Wugapodes.

The following had consensus support of participating editors:

1. Corrosive RfA atmosphere

   The atmosphere at RfA is deeply unpleasant. This makes it so fewer candidates wish to run and also means that some members of our community don't comment/vote.

2. Level of scrutiny

   Many editors believe it would be unpleasant to have so much attention focused on them. This includes being indirectly a part of watchlists and editors going through your edit history with the chance that some event, possibly a relatively trivial event, becomes the focus of editor discussion for up to a week.

3. Standards needed to pass keep rising

   It used to be far easier to pass RfA however the standards necessary to pass have continued to rise such that only "perfect" candidates will pass now.

4. Too few candidates

   There are too few candidates. This not only limits the number of new admin we get but also makes it harder to identify other RfA issues because we have such a small sample size.

5. "No need for the tools" is a poor reason as we can find work for new admins

The following issues had a rough consensus of support from editors:

6. Lifetime tenure (high stakes atmosphere)
   Because RfA carries with it lifetime tenure, granting any given editor sysop feels incredibly important. This creates a risk adverse and high stakes atmosphere.
7. Admin permissions and unbundling
   There is a large gap between the permissions an editor can obtain and the admin toolset. This brings increased scrutiny for RFA candidates, as editors evaluate their feasibility in lots of areas.
8. RfA should not be the only road to adminship
   Right now, RfA is the only way we can get new admins, but it doesn't have to be.

Please consider joining the brainstorming which will last for the next 1-2 weeks. This will be followed by Phase 2, a 30 day discussion to consider solutions to the problems identified in Phase 1.

---

There are 2 future mailings planned. One when Phase 2 opens and one with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Best, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

List of Victoria Crosses by school

Hello, I have just seen that the above article has been deleted after a deletion discussion resulted in that decision.I understand that this is Wikipedia protocol and I am not disputing it.

I actually created that page in around 2007 which was highlighting the disproportionate way that certain schools/social classes were recognised for gallantry. It had a very robust deletion discussion then which actually resulted in a keep. As Wikipedia has moved on and new policies developed, so the debate has changed. Fair enough. I didn’t realise the more recent deletion debate was occurring (although in fairness I was informed).

However, many many hours went into that article from a large amount of contributors over the period that Wikipedia deemed it a worthy inclusion. I am a little sad that has now disappeared. I am not asking for you to reinstate the article at all. However, would it be possible to get a copy of the page? Preferably the wiki code that underpins it?

Many thanks Kwib (talk) 07:47, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Kwib:, I've restored the last revision before the AfD to User:Kwib/List of Victoria Crosses by school, and a list of contributors (for attribution) is on the talk page. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 10:31, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for doing this. Kwib (talk) 16:44, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

RfA Reform 2021 Phase 2 has begun

Following a 2 week brainstorming period and a 1 week proposal period, the 30 day discussion of changes to our Request for Adminship process has begun. Following feedback on Phase 1, in order to ensure that the largest number of people possible can see all proposals, new proposals will only be accepted for the for the first 7 days of Phase 2. The 30 day discussion is scheduled to last until November 30. Please join the discussion or even submit your own proposal.

There is 1 future mailing planned with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

16:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

WP:Articles for deletion/2020 Duhallow Junior A Hurling Championship

Can you revisit the close for this article? After the close, the nominator and the first delete votes, were blocked as sock puppets. Though I wouldn't be surprised if it isn't notable - but I can't see the article. Thanks, Nfitz (talk) 01:05, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

OK, I've struck the sock votes and relisted it, although I was tempted to just let it be as there still seemed to be a consensus to delete, albeit one short of a full quorum. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 11:03, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:05, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

deletion review/feedback

1.145.149.66 (talk) 02:27, 13 December 2021 (UTC)13/12/2021

Hi, you deleted my company's page 'myDNA' due to "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". It was simply a company page discussing our history, structure and products. Just wondering if you could please provide further feedback/recommendations that we could make or consider reviewing your decision to delete?

Kindest

Draft:MyDNA was written in a clearly promotional tone and had absolutely no third-party references. Wikipedia is not a business directory, it is an encyclopedia which contains articles on notable companies on which a substantial amount of third party reliable source material exists. Writing an article about your own company is strongly discouraged, even if it is notable. For more information please read Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations and WP:COI – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 10:12, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

RFA 2021 Completed

The 2021 re-examination of RFA has been completed. 23 (plus 2 variants) ideas were proposed. Over 200 editors participated in this final phase. Three changes gained consensus and two proposals were identified by the closers as having the potential to gain consensus with some further discussion and iteration. Thanks to all who helped to close the discussion, and in particular Primefac, Lee Vilenski, and Ymblanter for closing the most difficult conversations and for TonyBallioni for closing the review of one of the closes.

The following proposals gained consensus and have all been implemented:

1. Revision of standard question 1 to Why are you interested in becoming an administrator? Special thanks to xaosflux for help with implementation.
2. A new process, Administrative Action Review (XRV) designed to review if an editor's specific use of an advanced permission, including the admin tools, is consistent with policy in a process similar to that of deletion review and move review. Thanks to all the editors who contributed (and are continuing to contribute) to the discussion of how to implement this proposal.
3. Removal of autopatrol from the administrator's toolkit. Special thanks to Wugapodes and Seddon for their help with implementation.

The following proposals were identified by the closers as having the potential to gain consensus with some further discussion and iteration:

1. An option for people to run for temporary adminship (proposal, discussion, & close)
2. An optional election process (proposal & discussion and close review & re-close)

Editors who wish to discuss these ideas or other ideas on how to try to address any of the six issues identified during phase 1 for which no proposal gained are encouraged to do so at RFA's talk page or an appropriate village pump.

A final and huge thanks all those who participated in this effort to improve our RFA process over the last 4 months.

---

This is the final update with no further talk page messages planned.

01:46, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Merchandise giveaway nomination

A token of thanks Hi Filelakeshoe! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk ~~~~~

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for this message, I hereby promise not to block any of these new masked identities as "long and confusing usernames" as I did after the IPv6 rollout – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 15:12, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:41, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

UCoC Enforcement

Probably talking to myself here, but just to put on the record that I voted NO in the UCoC Enforcement vote.

If local arbitration and dispute resolution procedures struggle to effect a resolution, the last thing we need is a foreign vessel sticking its nose in, inevitably creating even more dialogue, more drama and more discord. We have solid proof that this is what happens. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 10:58, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy (late) First Edit Day, Filelakeshoe, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! --Isro! ^chatter 19:02, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

New administrator activity requirement

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

1. Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
2. Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:52, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

A vision of the future

It is the year 2030 on en.wikipedia. Administrators now need to climb one incremental service award per year or lose their tools. Obviously, everyone knows that admin standards need to keep getting stricter because occasionally admins make mistakes and get drawn and quartered for them in front of Arbcom, which makes Wikipedia look bad. If we have fewer admins, admins make fewer mistakes, right? That's just basic maths. People need to have about 30,000 edits and 5 years of experience to even stand a chance of passing an RfA now, with an impeccable record with no bad edits throughout the whole tenure. For every 50 admins that depart, maybe one gets promoted if they're lucky.

Meanwhile, WP:ANI becomes a ghost town. WP:AIV is so large that it takes forever to load, even on an undecuple core i69 processor. AfDs take a month to be closed, other XfDs longer. WP:AFC collapses entirely. How does en.wikipedia resolve these issues? Why, with automated moderation, of course. What could possibly go wrong?

Now to cbeck the archives in a decade and see if there's any truth to this... – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 15:03, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Understanding

Please explain why am I looking at this Tiwonia22 (talk) 10:53, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

No idea, sorry. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 14:49, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Fred Everything for deletion

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

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

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

UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:29, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Hazel Henderson RD

I nominated Hazel Henderson for RD. The article appeared ready to post before the nomination was archived. User:PFHLai said to ask someone to take a look a the article as a review before it could be posted. Could you take a look to see if everything is in the clear? Thank you, Thriley (talk) 01:35, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, sorry for not noticing this in time, I was MIA this weekend, seems it's sorted now. The article looks good. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 11:45, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

"Platty Joobs" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Platty Joobs and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 2#Platty Joobs until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 03:02, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Esko color

Template:Esko color has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 14:17, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

6 support, 2 neutral and 4 oppose from me this year, with a constant lingering wonder about whether ArbCom needs to be decreased in size considering the lack of cases compared to previous years. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 11:00, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of cultural icons of Australia

Hello, Filelakeshoe,

I didn't mean to step on your toes when I deleted some of these articles. I thought that you hadn't noticed that most of the nominated articles weren't deleted when you closed this AFD discussion. I've found this the rule, more than the exception, with most bundled nominations that most of the articles aren't deleted by XFDCloser when the discussion is closed. Most editors do bundled nominations infrequently and they are not aware of the proper way to list other nominated pages. But I apologize if you thought I was interfering with you carrying out your work, that was not my intention. All the best, Liz ^Read! Talk! 23:41, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Absolutely not! I appreciated the help :) I was dawdling with deleting the other pages manually cos I spent far too long looking for redlinks to remove before realising there basically weren't any. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 23:46, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I finally worked out what was going on with List of cultural icons of England, there was a template with a hidden link transcluded on a gazillion pages. Fixed now. Thanks for catching all the other links – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 23:59, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Requesting Page mover rights

Hi there @Filelakeshoe. Lately I've been reviewing a lot of drafts at AfC, as the backlog drive is going on, but sometimes I run into a problem while accepting drafts. Some of the draft title which I try to move already exist on the mainspace as a redirect to some other article, as a result I have to CSD tag it under G6 Housekeeping and non-controversial cleanup and wait for an administrator to delete it. Example here, here, and here. I don't have any problem in waiting for an admin to delete them, but this page here (List of Miss Earth editions) put me into a dilemma. I was trying to accept Draft:List of Miss Earth editions but couldn't as the redirect exists, and I don't think I can CSD tag it for deletion as the redirect page states
This is a redirect from a page containing substantive page history. This page is kept as a redirect to preserve its former content and attributions ...... nor delete this page.. I believe a round-robin swap would be ideal in this case. I frequently run into this 'articleexists' problem that's why I wanted to ask for the Page mover rights. The Wikipedia:Page mover article states that At their discretion, any administrator can grant this right to experienced and trusted users who regularly move pages... And so I ask you for the rights. Here are the pages I have moved which shows my familiarity. However, the page mover article also states that the reviewer is expected to have atleast 6 months of editing history, which I think I lack (this account was created 4 months ago). But hopefully I still think I am worthy of the user right as I have substantial knowledge of the policies and other related stuffs. I would appreciate if you could grant the right to me, or if not, provide a solution to my problems, it would be great. Thanks. ❯❯❯ Raydann^(Talk) 20:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Raydann - for the List of Miss Earth editions draft, I think the appropriate solution would actually be a history merge, so that the page history from before it was made into a redirect is preserved under the new article from draftspace. Back in the day before we had draftspace, the new article would have simply overwritten the redirect. Page mover won't help you do history merges, unfortunately, as you need the delete and undelete buttons (I can take care of this one). As for the rights, would you mind requesting that at WP:PERM? It isn't an administrative area I ever work in, so I'd rather your request be reviewed by those more familiar with the process re how strictly we're supposed to interpret those thresholds. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 21:57, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Mike Wazowski looks like it needs history merging as well, in fact. As for Hikmat Kumar Karki, the history of that redirect contains a page very similar to the draft and the user who wrote it was blocked by User:JBW for block evasion, so I'd like to know more about that. The draft's creator is probably the same user. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 22:05, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Having looked at Draft:List of Miss Earth editions, I'm not entirely convinced it needs to be a separate article. It's just a table, and a very similar table exists in the article Miss Earth which could be expanded with those extra columns. The page history in the redirect is there because a similar article was deemed unnecessary and redundant in the past. Mike Wazowski is done though. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 22:16, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Filelakeshoe. Thanks for all the help here and the suggestion. As of now, I would like to gain more experience in moving pages, and ergo I'd apply for permissions once I am more than sure I meet the requirements. Now talking about the drafts, I can see that another admin has already moved Hikmat Kumar Karki, and as the previous creator was blocked, this new creator may or may not be a sock. That's upto an SPI investigation. Now I have declined Draft:List of Miss Earth editions as you were right, it doesn't need a seperate page for just the list. Now comes the interesting part, Mike Wazowski. It looks like the Draft:Mike Wazowski article is gone, due to a complication in page move. Examining the page logs I can see that you tried to preserve history by a history merge, and then lastly @Liz deleted the page (as shown in the logs). In the page history I can see the edit summary by Liz as Liz moved page Draft talk:Mike Wazowski to Mike Wazowski: Talk page forgotten in article move. I'm not so sure about what happened but right now the Mike Wazowski article is empty and sitting in the mainspace, while the draft article is gone. I sincerely apologise because all of this mess was created in spite of my actions, and I hope we can fix everything as soon as convenient. Thank you. ❯❯❯ Raydann^(Talk) 05:38, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

I believe the Mike Wazowski article is fixed now. Thank you both @Filelakeshoe & @Liz for helping, and apologies again for the mess. ❯❯❯ Raydann^(Talk) 08:39, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I forgot the talk page! Looks fine now. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 09:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Cliff Pierre

Hello @Filelakeshoe the article for Cliff Pierre is not advertisement or copyright infringement, I would like to appeal your decision. HenryJacobson1 (talk) 17:46, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

It was plainly promotional. We're not interested in hosting anyone's resume, this is an encyclopedia, not LinkedIn. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 18:50, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Also, please note that if anyone is paying you to edit Wikipedia, you need to disclose this on your userpage. See WP:PAID. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 18:54, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

What do you define as promotional? It was more of a biography than it was an advertisement. And I'm not being paid I follow this person and thought he needed a wikipedia. So what do I do to get it approved sir? HenryJacobson1 (talk) 03:55, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

This person is clearly doesn't meet the criteria for notability and yet you created the article anyway. Philipnelson99 (talk) 04:34, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Nikhil Prasad

What is your opinion about my contested deletion at Draft talk:Nikhil Prasad? Jay 💬 14:45, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I didn't see that. I agree and have restored the draft and reverted to the last good version. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 14:52, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Restoring deleted expired drafts

Hello, Filelakeshoe,

I've seen you around AFD lately and now I see that you are putting in some time at WP:REFUND. I don't blame you, restoring drafts for editors who want to work on them is one of the more pleasant admin tasks I know of.

But here's one thing that's not in any of the admin guides: When you restore a draft that has been deleted for CSD G13 reasons, the admin has to make a minor edit to the page or it immediately becomes eligible for G13 deletion again because, of course, it hasn't been edited in at least six months (which is why it was deleted). What many admins who help out at REFUND make use of is User:SD0001/RFUD-helper...if you use it, the script will make these little edits for you on the restored draft so you don't have to remember to. Just a suggestion. I hope you have a pleasant weekend! Liz ^Read! Talk! 00:29, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that! I've installed the script :) – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 00:33, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:55, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

User talk:Vanmathiscp1234

You may wish to revoke TPA. Cahk (talk) 08:10, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done thanks for the heads up! – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 08:49, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Deletion of Rakesh Kumar Tiwary

May I know the detailed reasons of deletion of this page 2402:3A80:1089:1B99:446A:90ED:DA55:8381 (talk) 13:00, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@2402:3A80:1089:1B99:446A:90ED:DA55:8381: It wasn't deleted, it was moved to draftspace as it's too short and the subject's notability is not yet established. You can continue to work on the article at Draft:Rakesh Kumar Tiwary and click the "submit for review" button when you're done. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 13:03, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Editor you blocked already block evaded

Hello. Earlier you blocked 81.104.128.234 based on my ANV report. They returned to the same article using a different IP address and made the same edit here and also mentioning me in the summary to make it clear. Ss112 14:27, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done cheers for the heads up – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 14:50, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

This cute Kitten is for you.

Misterrrrr (talk) 06:02, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Autopatrolled granted

Hi Filelakeshoe, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled user right to your account. This means that pages you create will automatically be marked as 'reviewed', and no longer appear in the new pages feed. Autopatrolled is assigned to prolific creators of articles, where those articles do not require further review, and may have been requested on your behalf by someone else. It doesn't affect how you edit; it is used only to manage the workload of new page patrollers.

Since the articles you create will no longer be systematically reviewed by other editors, it is important that you maintain the high standard you have achieved so far in all your future creations. Please also try to remember to add relevant WikiProject templates, stub tags, categories, and incoming links to them, if you aren't already in the habit; user scripts such as Rater and StubSorter can help with this. As you have already shown that you have a strong grasp of Wikipedia's core content policies, you might also consider volunteering to become a new page patroller yourself, helping to uphold the project's standards and encourage other good faith article writers.

Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Schwede66 17:58, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @HouseBlaster: and @Schwede66: thanks for this, I was actually wondering today whether I should grant this back to myself as I've noticed my disambiguation pages and redirects from page moves etc. have been showing up in the patrol log which is probably pointless. I'm glad someone else took the initiative. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 18:51, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

List of most consecutive Pro Bowl selections by National Football League players

May I know the exact detailed reasons for the deletion of this page? Aquacannon (talk) 09:13, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

The page was deleted after a deletion discussion in which there was a consensus to delete, specifically that the page did not meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion as a list as there were not enough reliable sources discussing that statistic as a topic. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 15:07, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. Yeah, I read over the discussion, I mean I'm not a moderator so idk but if that's your guys' decision then alright.

How many reliable sources must the page need to meet the criteria in your view? Aquacannon (talk) 08:30, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

It's more about "significant coverage" than about the number of sources specifically - the WP:N guideline just requires "reliable, independent sources" in the plural, of which one must be a secondary source, but they have to amount to significant coverage. A lot of lists have been nominated for deletion recently because of a lack of in-depth coverage of the list topic itself. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 02:37, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Syrian Revolution Network

I see you did not respond on his talkpage. There is no opposition for the merger. Sakiv (talk) 22:06, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for the delayed response, I'm currently travelling. You can just perform the merge it's no problem. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 16:03, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Give me a break

Regarding this edit summary, if you aren't aware, pronunciations are WP:OR magnets. It's better that they are sourced than people changing it back and forth based on their personal understanding. So no, I don't think there should be a break in policy for them. TylerBurden (talk) 22:34, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Completely disagree. You could use that same argument to argue that any translation / glossing of foreign language quotes or source material into English has to be sourced which would be ridiculous - we trust editors to know what stuff in languages they speak means. Similarly when it comes to IPA pronunciations we should trust speakers of languages to know how words in their language are pronounced (as we do with audio files), and we have IPA help pages (which are curated based on reliable linguistic sources) to help us present that information in a consistent fashion. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 22:50, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Translation of text and pronunciations are not the same thing, one can be done by simply putting it into a translation tool, the other requires understanding of both a language and the IPA system. Readers deserve better than WP:OR that editors who add them apparently can't even agree on. TylerBurden (talk) 22:56, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

If you think translation tools are a substitute for actual humans who speak languages, we're not going to convince each other of anything here, so there's no point continuing this discussion. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 23:07, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

I never said that, but sure, whatever floats your boat, bye bye. TylerBurden (talk) 23:11, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Remove/delete this revision

Hello, Myself Farhan. Please remove/delete this revision. - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Leena_Gangopadhyay&oldid=1141513663 ≈ Farhan  «Talk» 08:19, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

I mean "hide" ≈ Farhan  «Talk» 08:59, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure that's blatant enough to be revdelled, but I've warned the IP. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 09:59, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Empty section discussion

At some point can you boldly edit the template's message? My on-the-spot "This article could be improved by adding text relevant to the section's heading" should probably not be in the passive voice and anyway more-or-less duplicates the second sentence. It need to convey that a previous editor thought someone should provide text described by the topic, and you can help! I also think DePiep was suggesting that the doc page could suggest other context-specific replacement text. David Brooks (talk) 17:48, 4 March 2023 (UTC) ETA: just looked at your user page. I grew up in Penge. David Brooks (talk) 17:49, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Sure, once the discussion is closed I'll have a go (maybe reword "you can help by adding to it" to "you can help by adding text relevant to the section's heading"?) I was definitely planning on adding Certes' explanation to the template documentation, and going through the cleanup backlog to remove some of the oldest instances. Nice, I grew up just down the road from you in Crystal Palace :) – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 22:26, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Sorry to nag, but several more recent comments suggest it would be really helpful to make its text into an invitation. It's almost venturing into "propose merge with {{Expand section}}" territory, but I think a reword as suggested would buy some time. David Brooks (talk) 03:02, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

I left a comment there, I feel uneasy about editing the template while the discussion is ongoing, hopefully someone will close it today – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 09:41, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. ICYMI, I forgot to mention that I added a reference to {{Under construction}} to this template's doc; it seems to belong there alongside {{Expand section}}, and as I said several editors noted that they use {{Empty section}} when they are really actively constructing. David Brooks (talk) 21:05, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Having read the discussion again, I am not sure any of my ideas for this are all that popular so I am just going to walk away and leave this be. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 21:44, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

sir why did you remove durga durgotinashini page , why sir

please don't remove like this, if you did then delete other pages too because those pages also vandalised... Sumancranebuddy21q00 (talk) 08:45, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Durga Durgotinashini was a redirect to List of programmes broadcast by Star Jalsha, which was deleted after a deletion discussion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of programmes broadcast by Star Jalsha). The Durga Durgotinashini page was once an article, but it was redirected to the list by an anon editor in November as it had no sources and showed little sign of meeting notability guidelines. Note that none of this is anything to do with pages being vandalised, and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is a poor argument against deletion.

If you'd like to try and rewrite the article based on independent sources, I can restore you a copy from before the redirect to draftspace. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 08:57, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Quiet Council of Krakoa

The page Quiet Council of Krakoa was been redirected to Krakoa and even in discussion no one responded to redirected it to Immortal X-Men page. Before discussion, it was once redirected to Immortal X-Men instead of Krakoa because that page contains little information about team. Now the page of Krakoa is itself redirected to Giant Sized X-Men, I request you to move the redirection of Quiet Council back to Immortal X-Men. Ringardiumleviossa (talk) 12:16, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Done, thanks – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 12:31, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Ringardiumleviossa (talk) 19:10, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Re: Prague metro stations

I see you already deleted my edits on Line B - thanks, I was about to do those myself. And I deleted my edits on Line A and the railway stations. Should I expect a block/ban/etc. for this incident? Piotrusp98 (talk) 03:41, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh sorry I missed that you'd done Line A too, thanks. I actually restored it to the railway stations, as rail services do use the zone system - metro and tram services don't. What this means in practice is if you just took a train from, say, Kladno to Praha-Veleslavín, you'd only need a 4-zone ticket (for zones B+1+2+3) but if you then changed onto the metro (at Nádraží Veleslavín) you'd need zones P+0 on your ticket as well. No block, your edits weren't vandalism! – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 08:54, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I just added the zone parameter to all the railway station infoboxes in Category:Railway stations in Prague and Category:Railway stations in Central Bohemian Region, it's definitely worth having on those. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 09:30, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Good Choice

Could you return the name to Good Choice, the "moderates" platform left the party and they returned to their original name Braganza (talk) 09:31, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Martin Krňávek

Thanks for your participation at the AfD for Martin Krňávek. I only saw it after doing a cleanup/expansion on the page after finding it on the Unreferenced BLPs cleanup list. But looks like we found similar sources. The Czech Willy Wonka. Keep up the good work! C679 05:37, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Leesi Gabriel Gborogbosi ‎

Hi, I see this AFD conversation ended as a soft delete. Could you make it available for edit as I am working on the article to repost it? Saw it on AFD and thought to rework it. I think it meets the notability clause, just badly written. Pshegs (talk) 08:13, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

@Pshegs:  Done I've moved it to your userspace at User:Pshegs/Leesi Gabriel Gborogbosi with a draft template. I noticed there's also a draft article which predates the one deleted, Draft:Leesi Gabriel Gborogbosi, so you can rework either one. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 08:59, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Seen. Pshegs (talk) 11:51, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi, done reworking it. Wanted you to check it out and allow you move it to mainspace if it works. Thanks. Pshegs (talk) 19:11, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Football in Slovakia

Football in Slovakia: urcite je lepsie ked citatel ide na hlavne stranky ktore sa castejsie aktualizuju Michael H (talk) 20:51, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Restore or move to draft Taisija Smirnova

Hi! Please restore or move to draft Taisija Smirnova Latvia national women's team player. I will update asap this page with citations and sources. Renārs Krīgers (talk) 10:20, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

OK, I've restored it to draft space, but please note that the AfD ended with a "delete" consensus so if it's moved back to mainspace without more reliable sources added it can be speedily deleted. Bear in mind the subject needs to have significant coverage (i.e. not just statistics) in multiple reliable sources independent of the subject to pass WP:BIO. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 18:46, 21 August 2023 (UTC)