User talk:Shritwod

Susan Etok page

You have gone through the article that I wrote about Susan Etok removing credible references and trying to get the page deleted. Your efforts have been noted by other editors as well to the point that I am convinced that you have a vested interest in this article because you are a Michael Jackson fan. Your comments in the article for deletion section seem full of malice.

I do not know and have not met Dr Etok, I wrote this article because I live in the town that she is from and she is always in the local papers and local news. Most recently last week.

I have spent alot of time researching this article and will not have my work destroyed because you have a grudge against the person in the article.

You have also made some comments in the article for deletion section about the subject in the article that could land you in legal hot water, but that is not of my concern.

Lola — Preceding unsigned comment added by Respect77 (talk • contribs) 10:38, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you are nothing to do with Ms Etok, then how come you are in possession of a studio-quality photograph of her? That seems rather odd. Shritwod (talk) 11:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shritwood, I am not sure what is wrong with you but you have some obssession with this lady that us not healthy. Why I have a studio quality picture of this lady because I downloaded it from her website with permission on no copyright restrictions. What has that got to do with anything? Objectivity is key here and you are not being objective. Anyone would think that you were racist or a Michael Jackson fan. You are not committed to getting accurate articles out there, you are hellbent on trying to ruin people's reputation. As an editor, you shouldn't be working on this article because it is clear that you know or have been involved with this woman. Your reaction is far too emotional to be one based on good editing and accuracy. Respect77 13:00, 28 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Respect77 (talk • contribs)

You claim in the copyright details that you are the copyright owner. You must therefore know the subject, or you must be make a false assertion about ownership. End of discussion. Shritwod (talk) 13:03, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am the copyright owner of the photo because I own the company that took her photographs. I am not the photographer and I have never spoken to or met the woman personally. We still ask for permission to use photos - it is courtesy!

So you own Paul William Photography? I am surprised that it has more than one person working for it. That should be very easy to verify. Oddly though, you said that you downloaded it from her web site. Now you say that an employee took the photograph. Perhaps you should get the details straight in your head. Shritwod (talk) 13:15, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Be my guest. Please verify the source of the photo.....Respect77 13:16, 28 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Respect77 (talk • contribs)

"England, UK" vs "England"

A discussion has been started at Wikipedia talk:UK Wikipedians' notice board#England, UK or just England? on a topic you have recently discussed elsewhere. Please have your say if you wish. Thanks, Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:08, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Arromanches-mulberry-1.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:17, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Samsung GT-M7500 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • com/samsung-night-effect-review-09x02x25.htm Mobile Gazette - Samsung Night Effect Review]</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:25, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir or Madam,

Can you please tell me why you have nominated this page for deletion?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimoninIceland (talk • contribs) 19:03, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Counties

They are indeed accurate to the place where the people were born. Anyone born in Birmingham before 1974 was born in Warwickshire. This is indisputable. Anyone born in Munich in 1985 was born in West Germany. To take your view to the logical extreme, you might as well say King Harold was born in East Sussex, Immanuel Kant was born in the Russian Federation, or that Abraham was Iraqi. None of them were, obviously, so why hold different standards for people born in the 20th century? Where being "helpful" diverges from accuracy, I side with accuracy. JamKaftan (talk) 20:38, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but we are not dealing with historical figures, we are dealing with contemporary ones. The addition of the counties in many cases does not add value and it does not seem to fit in with the WP:UKPLACE guidelines. Shritwod (talk) 22:50, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff Davidson (speaker)

Most of the edits that have been made by moderators has not been to correct neutral tone issues, but rather the mass cutting of information. I understand perfectly fine if there are issues with neutrality, however I have sought to substantiate all of the claims on the article with some sort of citation or another. Many hours have been put into researching the necessary citations, and I would appreciate if the concerned moderators would not remove the properly cited information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by C3po2398 (talk • contribs) 14:12, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Vitelcom for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Vitelcom 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/Vitelcom until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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

Climate Action: author

I note you told Mac about the nom for del [1] but though he created the article, it was as a redirect in 200. The current form was created by P recently William M. Connolley (talk) 21:36, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I should have checked what Twinkle had actually done.. Shritwod (talk) 02:11, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Climate Action Plan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Climate Action Plan 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/Climate Action Plan until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. J♯m (talk | contribs) 16:10, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Since you contributed to the discussion over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Climate action, I wanted to ping you and let you know that your input would be valued. I am posting this notice on the talk page for every editor who has contributed to that discussion and the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avoiding dangerous climate change, regardless of their vote or apparent viewpoint. J♯m (talk | contribs) 16:19, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --Mr. Magoo (talk) 14:02, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IsAnybodyDown?

I adjusted an edit] of yours on IsAnybodyDown? & restored a header you had removed when you restored the Dryvyng content. Wanted you to know. Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 14:28, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

{{Admin help}} There is a current AfD at AfD:Craig Brittain (entrepreneur) which has been the subject of vote manipulation by someone I believe is closely related to the subject of the article, and also there has been attempted canvassing. Overall the whole thing has been disruptive. It does seem that there is a clear consensus to delete the article, yet it was relisted. Can I request that the article be deleted now? Shritwod (talk) 14:44, 6 November 2016 (UTC)  Done Ronhjones  (Talk) 15:44, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Shritwod. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Multics-book.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Multics-book.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Train2104 (t • c) 23:16, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

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

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

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

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Wikipedia1234-reddit.png

Thanks for uploading File:Wikipedia1234-reddit.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 13:45, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for File:British-independence-day-canvassing.png

Thanks for uploading File:British-independence-day-canvassing.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 13:46, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:British-independence-day-canvassing.png

Thank you for uploading File:British-independence-day-canvassing.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Also:

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 03:00, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Adrian Davies

Good shout. Article is now nuked. Guy (Help!) 21:49, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018

Information icon Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to Nokia 3650. I noticed that when you added the image to the infobox, you added it as a thumbnail. In the future, please do not use thumbnails when adding images to an infobox (see WP:INFOBOXIMAGE). What does this mean? Well in the infobox, when you specify the image you wish to use, instead of doing it like this:

|image=[[File:SomeImage.jpg|thumb|Some image caption]]

Instead just supply the name of the image. So in this case you can simply do:

|image=SomeImage.jpg.

There will then be a separate parameter for the image caption such as |caption=Some image caption. Please note that this is a generic form message I am leaving on your page because you recently added a thumbnail to an infobox. The specific parameters for the image and caption may be different for the infobox you are using! Please consult the Template page for the infobox being used to see better documentation. Thanks! Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 04:06, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

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

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

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

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OI Shritwod

Did you go to Sawtry School? I did. Martin was a very notable student. Ask anyone who went there. I did, I was witness to the "olive record of 95" and he was in a Relationship with the schools joker man Daryl.

I feel this was needed on the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.6.164.210 (talk) 15:45, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bedford Vehicles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Opel Vivaro (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:21, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Give some time to enhance the article

Hello, thank you for your edit. I request that you kindly give some time to update the article with more sources. It is a new article and is being developed. Thanks Salbador7070 (talk) 17:48, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that you are establishing notability, just because this is someone's lawyer. Which articles from reliable sources indicate that this person is notable in their own right, i.e. as the primary subject of an article rather than as someone else's lawyer? Shritwod (talk) 20:01, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Check the history of an article before marking for deletion

Please always check the history of articles before proposing it for deletion. Two senior editors (one of which is an administrator) have already worked on this article but did not propose it for deletion why are you proposing it for deletion? The article has already been patrolled by the administrator who removed some deprecated sources from it. Please, I beg to remove the tag. Thank you Salbador7070 (talk) 17:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dailymail

Please be aware that the Daily Mail is considered deprecated and should not be used in most cases. Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:48, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was reverting some persistent disruptive editing by another person before adding a RS. Shritwod (talk) 09:51, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Tye

Hi! Revisiting the AFD for Matthew Tye (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Tye (3rd nomination)), I found South China Morning Post covered him in this 2020 story. This can be combined with this profile from the China-based That's Magazines (intended for foreigners living in China). Perhaps we can see if we can write a new article about Tye. WhisperToMe (talk) 00:04, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, I would also like to follow up on the AFD for Matthew Tye (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Tye (3rd nomination)), Various internet articles related to Matthew are available so this indicates he is a notable person - should we proceed to create a new article or can we have the previous one restored so we can make updates.
Infograbber19 (talk) 10:31, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

References

  1. ^ https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4057535
  2. ^ https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/coronavirus-china-trail-leading-back-to-wuhan-labs/
  3. ^ https://china.usc.edu/american-youtubers-china-qa-winston-sterzal-and-matthew-tye
  4. ^ https://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-china-friction-turns-youtube-093000892.html
  5. ^ https://www.fr24news.com/a/2020/04/coronavirus-and-china-unconfirmed-origin-in-wuhan-laboratory-but-unconvincing-denial.html
@Infograbber19: I think The Beijinger should be a good source too. The Forbes article is written by a "contributor" (non-staff) and Forbes does not editorially review articles written by contributors, so that one does not count. See Forbes in Wikipedia:Perennial sources. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:26, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@WhisperToMe: Thanks - I have removed some of the more dubious sources that were there. Infograbber19 (talk) 02:29, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Shritwod: Hi - Just wondering if it's best to create a new article or is it possible to undelete the existing one based on the sources relating to Matthew Tye (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Tye (3rd nomination)) Infograbber19 (talk) 09:28, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@WhisperToMe: @Infograbber19: Not one of those looks like a reliable source, they are all blogs, non-notable of the mention of Tye is incidental. Even the Forbes one is a blog (see WP:RSVETTING). I don't think notability has been established and you have to bear in mind that the article has been deleted three times already. Without better sources I think it would just get deleted again. Shritwod (talk) 14:06, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
One of them is an article of the South China Morning Post which in Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources is deemed generally reliable (though with caveats for recent articles about Chinese politics). The article was published in 2020, after the last AFD (which was in 2018). The article gives Wikipedia:Significant coverage to Tye. That's one of at least two needed articles for notability. Now there's another consideration: The Beijinger, which did an article on Tye and Sterzel doing a trip in China (and the author is the "Deputy Managing Editor" so this is not a blog), is published by True Run Media and is a publication for expatriates in Beijing. There's also That's Magazines, which are published by Shanghai-based JY International Cultural Communications. I could start a reliable sources discussion about these expat publications in China if you like. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:16, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Shritwod: Following up on this one - as mentioned this individual has become more notable since 2018 and in relation to the source material, I believe taiwan news , national review , and fr24news are valid sources? Do you think these have enough content along with @WhisperToMe: comments about The Beijinger, South China Morning Post That's Magazines? Finally the initial deletion was for a different individual Matthew_Tye First RFD , 2nd and 3rd were back in 2018, Thanks. Infograbber19 (talk) 05:17, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Infograbber19 and WhisperToMe: If you guys need any assistance, let me know. I was actually planning to create a new article on Matthew Tye a month ago (around the middle of August), but due to limited time and being busy with other things, i forgot about it. In my opinion, of the ones already shared, the following are fine:

Here are some additional sources:

I don't like the fr24news article (here), since it lacks the author's name. If there is no objection, i can create a new article with some basic information, and we can begin adding from there. What's your opinion Shritwod? Demetrios1993 (talk) 13:51, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Those are better sources, but I'm not sure they pass the threshold of WP:BIO - to be fair I think a LOT of biographies in Wikipedia exist but don't really pass the threshold - specifically, if we count Tye as being a film-maker then I'm not sure it passes this:
Authors, editors, journalists, filmmakers, photographers, artists, architects, and other creative professionals:
  1. The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors; or
  2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique; or
  3. The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews; or
  4. The person's work (or works) has: (a) become a significant monument, (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) won significant critical attention, or (d) been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.
What makes Tye's work stand out from any other social blogger? It might be worth going to WP:YTP and having a look there if you think he's a significant YouTuber, they have a list of requests for articles for creation. Shritwod (talk) 13:24, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that he's a foreign blogger in China, which is something of a novelty. It's the same reason why Amy Lyons and David Gulasi were covered in the Australian media. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:43, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comment. I do agree with you that there are many biographies which don't meet the necessary requirements. Matthew Tye is sort of in a grey zone at least. He is cited in a number of articles, and aside of being a successful YouTuber, he has also co-starred in the documentaries Conquering Southern China and Conquering Northern China. Personally, i don't think there will be any assistance by posting in Wikipedia:WikiProject YouTube/Articles Needed For Creation; there is not much activity going on there. Demetrios1993 (talk) 09:20, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - I would like to add that both Winston Sterzel and Matthew Tye are original content creators and fairly notable social commentators who have documented unprecedented footage of life in and around China - both Winston and Matthew had been subject to a campaign to remove their presence from Wikipedia by now defunct Wikipedia users back in 2018. Matthew Tye was previously linked from Winston's wikipedia page as these 2 characters are synonymous with each other and i believe it does the wider Wikipedia community an injustice to not be able to find out some more information about Matthew, as people can do about Winston. I believe there is definitely a fairly good case of reinstating Matthew's page as I was also drawn to lookup Matthew after recently seeing various articles as we have described above as well as their documentary. I had noticed the quite aggressive campaign to remove Winston's page [[2]] and also the same users who at the exact same time also campaigned to remove Matthew's page - this in itself suggest they are both notable considering the amount of discussion they have generated. Based on these criteria I believe that we have a reasonable case to reinstate Matthew's page and also recreate the links from Winston's page to Matthews page as had been there originally as these 2 individuals work as a team on their public activities. Pinging previous Admin on (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Tye (3rd nomination)) User:Sandstein and Admin for (Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Winston_Sterzel_(2nd_nomination)) User:Oshwah to review the conversation, please review the history of the AfD's for Matthew / Winston as well as the talk and discussion they have generated and I am sure this will show that they have generated enough interest to each have an individual article Infograbber19 (talk) 14:04, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:13, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Center for Inquiry Investigations Group for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Center for Inquiry Investigations Group 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/Center for Inquiry Investigations Group 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.

Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 21:41, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Solis

Sorry I was not able to contest the speedy deletion nomination in time. I think you missed my comment on the Talk Page. The page wasn’t a repost; I spent days creating it from scratch with many sources. The deletion debate lacked thorough research. There’s significant coverage of the subject, as confirmed in a previous debate [1] years ago. I added all the sources from that debate and more. Reviews of his books and descriptions by respected experts like Andrew Keen and Chris Brogan, all cited in my page, support his notability. My page should be restored and you can nominate it for a deletion debate to determine the current consensus. The first debate had more comments and arguments and resulted in a keep. Even the nominator changed their vote to keep, while the second ended in delete with only two comments. So, is he notable or not? My page and the earlier debate both affirm his notability. JJelax (talk) 11:38, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]