User talk:Boleyn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

User:Boleyn is the same editor as User:Boleyn2 and User:Boleyn3. I used to use the three log-ins to increase my watchlist, but they can now all fit on one.

This editor is a
Master Editor IV
and is entitled to display this
Orichalcum Editor Star.

I'm editing much less than I used to, so please don't be surprised if a reply takes several days. I will reply as soon as I'm back editing.

Contents

User talk:Boleyn/Archive 2[edit]

User talk:Boleyn/Archive 3[edit]

User talk:Boleyn/Archive 4[edit]

User talk:Boleyn/Archive 5[edit]

User talk:Boleyn/Archive 6[edit]

User talk:Boleyn/Archive 7[edit]

User talk:Boleyn/Archive 8[edit]

User talk:Boleyn/Archive 9[edit]

User talk:Boleyn/Archive 10[edit]

User talk:Boleyn/Archive 15[edit]

User talk:Boleyn/Archive 25[edit]

User talk:Boleyn/Archive 35[edit]

User talk:Boleyn/Archive 36[edit]

User:Boleyn/Archive 37[edit]

Can you please review[edit]

can you please review my page Draft:Nanna Prakara please please and move the page to article pleaseShreyashv26 (talk) 17:04, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Boleyn....I submitted an article on Dr Albrecht Preusser which you placed in draft. What changes would you like for that article so that it may be published? with thanks FZS001 — Preceding unsigned comment added by FZS001 (talkcontribs) 09:13, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello, FZS001. The main problem was that it was unreferenced, I'm pleased to see you've addressed this. I'm no expert in this field so will leave it for the AfC reviewer to see if they have final suggestions. Well done on your hard work, Boleyn (talk) 05:53, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

The main issue[edit]

Hey Boleyn new to meet you too. I have a few questions on the Rosa Llunch Bramon and its problem. First is the citing problem, I have a few reference and one of the reference has more references to it. Whats your best advice on what I should do since I'm new. Second for the notability issue, She is has won awards and other things I'm just taking a break from her page before researching for it. Wont she also apply to the Notability standards since she is part of Wiki Project Woman in Red for the "Notable Female Historians without a link in Wiki" and has several articles and pages written about her and her occupation. Thanks for helping the pages and its issues and respond to me ASAP. --PrimaLInnstinct (talk) 20:13, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

PrimaLInnstinct, thanks for your message and welcome to Wikipedia. Thanks for taking the time to create an article. The references would be clearer is they were inline (see WP:INLINECITE) - at the moment it's unclear where each bit of information comes from. From what you have written, she sounds notable, she just needs referenced info on her awards, and any other way she meets WP:PROF or WP:GNG. It can sometimes take a while for a new article to get all that added though. Thanks again, Boleyn (talk) 21:47, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Boleyn, thanks for your edit on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glozhene,_Vratsa_Province. What is the easiest way to communicate with you?--Ivsson (talk) 14:30, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Either here or on your page is fine Ivsson. Well done on improving the page. Boleyn (talk) 16:11, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Boleyn, I left you a message on Ivsson (talk) as well. Lets continue there... I'll try to find some more sources.

Have a good one, --Ivsson (talk) 16:17, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

@Boleyn Hey, Boleyn. Can you, please help me out with this one: Rumen Surdzhiyski? I think I've messed the template. --Ivsson (talk) 04:24, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Toni Baker[edit]

Hello, Boleyn. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Toni Baker".

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

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. CptViraj (📧) 08:08, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

One new one I found for a DAB[edit]

Here Gene Morgan, there was 2 others I found recently, but I can't remember what, I might be able to find them later. Wgolf (talk) 18:20, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

More: Roy Payne and Ralph Jones. Wgolf (talk) 18:42, 28 June 2019 (UTC) Well here is another one Frank Wells . Wgolf (talk) 20:48, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

And another-Carl Albrecht. Wgolf (talk) 05:49, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
Another one to add along with the one I mentioned last night-Percy Rodriguez, which has the case of Percy Rodríguez and Percy Rodriguez being listed as 2 different people. Wgolf (talk) 22:57, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I have proposed to move Carl Albrecht to a disambiguated title, and make that title the disambiguation page. bd2412 T 00:09, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Celeb Gogglebox[edit]

what do you recommend I do to this article? I was hoping after a cerate this then more experienced people on wiki can improve it.--Slindsell15 (talk) 19:05, 28 June 2019 (UTC) Slindsell15, thanks for your work on this. How do you feel it meets WP:BCAST or WP:GNG? At the moment, it's unclear. Other editors can still work on it in draftspace, it's just it doesn't meet the criteria for inclusion in an encyclopaedia at this time. Boleyn (talk) 14:51, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Deir ez-Zor insurgency (2019)[edit]

Thanks for moving it to a "Draft". I personally thought the material was unsourced (or unverifiably sourced) and non-notable and shouldn't deserve an article, but another editor was insisting on mixing the material (sourced only to twitter) into an article with a totally different subject, so to try and compromise with him I created a totally new article with the material for him to expand on. Which he didn't. So, as far as I am concerned, the material can get deleted if the community thinks it should (and looking at Wikipedia's policy I think it should). Thanks again! EkoGraf (talk) 11:03, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, EkoGraf. Boleyn (talk) 14:41, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Re: Fathi Al-Majbari[edit]

The article Fathi Al-Majbari is fully sourced, if I'm not mistaken it was checked by another editor when I first made it. Go back through the article history and look at the original version I made. Some other person edited the article for some inexplicable reason and removed almost everything I wrote.

It would have been great if you could have checked the history and just undone this other guy's edits before moving the article. Prince Hubris (talk) 16:54, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

You're right, that's my error, now amended. Thanks for your work on this, Prince Hubris. Boleyn (talk) 06:01, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

WP:LISTVERIFY[edit]

I don't appreciate the charge of edit warring. The first revert was of a bold page move after a discussion where multiple editors disagreed with the move and the second was asking you to specify what items you think are not fit for inclusion. I recommend you read WP:LISTVERIFY as there is no reason to add inline citations for list items that are obviously appropriate for inclusion. So a general {{unreferenced}} tag is not helpful because it doesn't make clear what items are not obviously appropriate for a page on canon law. I'd ask that you actually read the page and raise concerns that are helpful rather than robotically placing a tag with no critical thought. Wugapodes [thɑk] [ˈkan.ˌʧɹɪbz] 18:39, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

I didn't say it needed inline citations - I tagged it as unreferenced, which it is. Boleyn (talk) 06:02, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Wraith: The Great War[edit]

Hello, there. I think you may be making a faulty assumption of you believe there is a consensus to send non-BLP stubs away from mainspace because they are not yet sourced. The convention has been to add sourcing templates, rather than sending articles to Draft or placing redirects. If you feel strongly that this consensus needs to change, we have RfC processes for that. :) Newimpartial (talk) 20:27, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi, NewImparial, I do not believe that all stubs should be moved from mainspace if unreferenced, neither do I do that without looking at different options. If I feel lack of references is the only concern, it would be tagged. This one had been clearly unreferenced for some time, and various editors had raised serious concerns about it, as there is no indication of why it meets WP:NBOOK or WP:GNG. Please submit at any time that's clear in the article.

Please also see the info in the New Page Patrol newsletter below: Move to draft NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations.

I didn't leave a clear enough edit summary and I apologise for that. Thanks for your work on this, Boleyn (talk) 06:08, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Boleyn. Thanks for the clarification. I would like to gently remind you that NPP is a project, not a policy, and that not everyone at WP agrees with its approaches and methods. This stub was five years old at the time of draftification, and only one other editor (the one placing the Bold redirect) had "serious concerns" about it (the unreferenced template does not represent "serious concern" in the case of non-BLP articles).
I appreciate that your goal in participating with NPR is to improve the quality of WP's articles, but do try to keep in mind that not all editors appreciate the deletionist paradigm that NPP and AFC tend to presuppose within their projects. Newimpartial (talk) 11:35, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Newimpartial, I am well aware that NPP is a project. The article, as it stood, was considered new, and there had been several editors with different concerns and moving it in different shapes, including redirecting. We'll have to agree to disagree on whether an unreferenced article is a 'serious concern' - it's not an exclusive reason for draftification or deletion but I would consider it a serious concern. It was moved to draft to prevent deletion/overwriting. There are a lot of assumptions about me, my motivations and my editing in your messages that I don't agree with, but I thank you for your work on Wikipedia and will bear in mind your opinions. Boleyn (talk) 13:00, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello again. Apart from my explicit assumption about possible belief in a consensus to send unreferenced stubs out of mainspace (which was a kind of Occam's razor of AGF), I don't actually think I have made any assumptions about your individual editing or motivations. I have made evidence-based judgements about the approaches, methods, and biases of NPP as a project, but I am not imputing them to you personally so you should not take it that way.
I will point out again that, outside of NPP, most editors do not regard 5-year-old stubs as "new", and reviewing the page histories I still only see one other editor raising what they presumably regarded as a "serious concern". My own previous interaction with the article was to place a stub tag, and it is my belief that tagging and templating was the policy-compliant course in this case. Certainly AfD nominations require WP:BEFORE, and the subject of this article would pass any competently performed and policy-compliant BEFORE exercise. So that's what the issues look like from my perspective, as you say, to "bear in mind". Newimpartial (talk) 14:03, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019[edit]

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hello Boleyn,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

More new features are being added to the feed, including the important red alert for previously deleted pages. This will only work if it is selected in your filters. Best is to 'select all'. Do take a moment to check out all the new features if you have not already done so. If anything is not working as it should, please let us know at NPR. There is now also a live queue of AfC submissions in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to review AfCs, but bear in mind that NPP is an official process and policy and is more important.

QUALITY of REVIEWING

Articles are still not always being checked thoroughly enough. If you are not sure what to do, leave the article for a more experienced reviewer. Please be on the alert for any incongruities in patrolling and help your colleagues where possible; report patrollers and autopatrolled article creators who are ostensibly undeclared paid editors. The displayed ORES alerts offer a greater 'at-a-glance' overview, but the new challenges in detecting unwanted new content and sub-standard reviewing do not necessarily make patrolling any easier, nevertheless the work may have a renewed interest factor of a different kind. A vibrant community of reviewers is always ready to help at NPR.

Backlog

The backlog is still far too high at between 7,000 and 8,000. Of around 700 user rights holders, 80% of the reviewing is being done by just TWO users. In the light of more and more subtle advertising and undeclared paid editing, New Page Reviewing is becoming more critical than ever.

Move to draft

NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations.

Notifying users

Remember to use the message feature if you are just tagging an article for maintenance rather than deletion. Otherwise articles are likely to remain perma-tagged. Many creators are SPA and have no intention of returning to Wikipedia. Use the feature too for leaving a friendly note note for the author of a first article you found well made or interesting. Many have told us they find such comments particularly welcoming and encouraging.

PERM

Admins are now taking advantage of the new time-limited user rights feature. If you have recently been accorded NPR, do check your user rights to see if this affects you. Depending on your user account preferences, you may receive automated notifications of your rights changes. Requests for permissions are not mini-RfAs. Helpful comments are welcome if absolutely necessary, but the bot does a lot of the work and the final decision is reserved for admins who do thorough research anyway.

Other news

School and academic holidays will begin soon in various places around the Western world. Be on the lookout for the usual increase in hoax, attack, and other junk pages.

Our next newsletter might be announcing details of a possible election for co-ordinators of NPR. If you think you have what it takes to micro manage NPR, take a look at New Page Review Coordinators - it's a job that requires a lot of time and dedication.


Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Hasse–Schmidt derivation[edit]

Please see Wikipedia:Parenthetical referencing and WP:CITEVAR. The article Hasse–Schmidt derivation is well-referenced in most of its sections. Only the definitions section is missing inline citations. You should not equate inline citations with footnotes; parenthetical referencing is an equally acceptable citation style. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:49, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Gratitude[edit]

Hello Boleyn, thanks for your edits too. It's nice having fellow users adding their contribution in this article. GiofanniRahman (talk) 16:00, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, GiofanniRahman, and as it's now reviewed it will be indexed by Google very soon. Boleyn (talk) 16:02, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

2002/03 and 2013-14 Iraqi League[edit]

Hi Boleyn. I would like to ask if you could help with an issue we're facing now in the Iraqi Premier League topic.

Basically there are contradicting sources about the league winners in 2002/03 and 2013/14. The sources are very shaky to say the least and I think an admin should have an look at it.

https://ahdaaf.me/2019/07/16/iraqs-post-truth-wikipedia-league-champions-how-four-titles-became-six/?cbg_tz=-120

The Wiki editor won't be convinced by what I say and won't change his opinion. Could you please help?

Steel Dogg (talk) 11:50, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Boleyn, I'm the Wiki editor Steel Dogg is referring to. I know Steel Dogg has good intentions but I feel that he is ignoring primary sources from reliable and reputable organisations or websites. Everything on the 2002–03 Iraqi First Division and 2013–14 Iraqi Premier League pages are well-referenced with primary sources. Why should we ignore a plethora of reliable primary sources just because of an opinion piece or lower quality secondary sources that's not how Wikipedia supposed to work. Hashim-afc (talk) 01:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Steel Dogg and Hashim-afc. It's a shame that's this dispute has arisen, when you both are clearly trying to make the article the best it can be. I'm not an admin, but I suggest contacting the most relevant Wikiprojects and seeing if someone who is familiar with these sources can help. Thank you both for your hard work, Boleyn (talk) 18:54, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Boleyn, it's already solved. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football

They suggested to revert the changes back. No titles won + disputes noted.

Thanks for your help anyway!

Steel Dogg (talk) 21:19, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

I'm glad to hear it's sorted, Steel Dogg. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 19:44, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Cecily Bulstrode and Cecily Boulstred[edit]

Hello, someone wrote another article about "Mistress Bulstrode" in 2016, which is Cecily Boulstred, it's longer than the one you started, and uses a less commonly found form of her family name. I don't know how to fix this, and thought you might, if you were exercised enough about it. Trust this finds you well.Unoquha (talk) 20:00, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, I have changed the name throughout the article now.Unoquha (talk) 21:26, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Carl Davies[edit]

Hello, Boleyn,

I deleted this page because you placed a tag indicating that the page was holding up a page move but you didn't state what page you wanted to move. I just wanted to let you know that the page had been deleted so you can go ahead with the move. Liz Read! Talk! 17:39, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Liz. Boleyn (talk) 19:44, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your previous work![edit]

Working Man's Barnstar.png The Working Woman's Barnstar
Thanks for helping out with the Mistagged unreferenced articles cleanup (thought I left you a barnstar before but I didn't). There has been a revive in the cleanup progress if you're interested :) MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:54, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Jamie Laing for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jamie Laing 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/Jamie Laing 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. Onel5969 TT me 15:00, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tim Ablitt[edit]

Notice

The article Tim Ablitt has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Subject not notable. Ablitt is only mentioned in reliable sources in the context of Tommy Robinson.

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. Lmatt (talk) 18:44, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

User:DilletantiAnonymous[edit]

Hello there! I share your frustration over the user in question and their creation of unrefernced painting articles and lack of communication. It is completely unnacceptable. Is there any action that can be taken? I noticed you had filed a case on the Administrator’s noticeboard/Incidents. Would you mind directing me to the exact case? Regards, Willbb234 (talk) 21:35, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Willbb234, it was here: [1]. Unfortunately it just died out, as sometimes happens if the editor in question just disappears for a few days and there aren't many people commenting. It's definitely worth you looking at raising it at WP:ANI again - I've been messaging this user for years with no changes. Thanks for your help, Boleyn (talk) 06:43, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Alright, thank you. I will take a look later and see what I can do. Regards, Willbb234Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 06:55, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

"Megan Barton" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Megan Barton. Since you had some involvement with the Megan Barton redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Launchballer 13:37, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Tim Ablitt[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Lmatt (talk) 22:33, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Elliott Wright[edit]

Notice

The article Elliott Wright has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails Notability - subject is only known for appearing briefly in 'The Only Way is Essex'

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. Jamesbuc (talk) 16:34, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Nicole Bass (television personality)[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Nicole Bass (television personality) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Jamesbuc (talk) 16:36, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Lewis Bloor[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Lewis Bloor requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Jamesbuc (talk) 16:37, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Nicole Bass (television personality)[edit]

Notice

The article Nicole Bass (television personality) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails notability reasons

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. Jamesbuc (talk) 17:45, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Lewis Bloor[edit]

Notice

The article Lewis Bloor has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails notability reasons and lacks sources for notability

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jamesbuc (talk) 17:46, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Bo Johnson[edit]

Hello, Boleyn,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Jbhunley and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Bo Johnson should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bo Johnson .

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Jbhunley}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

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

Jbh Talk 16:26, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Jbhunley. I only created it as a redirect to a different target, but appreciate you letting me know and I will look it over. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 19:19, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, I did not notice the author of the article did a copy-paste-move from Draft: to the page you created so you got the auto-template instead of them. Cheers! Jbh Talk 19:36, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Not at all, I was still somewhat involved and interested. Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 19:48, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

British Order of Battle of New Orleans[edit]

Hey replying to your notice, what exactly is the issue? Tirronan (talk) 14:19, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Tirronan, it lacked references, but this has been resolved by another editor. Thanks for taking the time to create it, Boleyn (talk) 19:45, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Jorge Jiménez[edit]

Please do not introduce inappropriate pages, such as Jorge Jiménez, to Wikipedia. Doing so is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:13, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Apologies. The page you had created was hijacked for a hoax. I have reverted. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:18, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

"House of Desmond" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect House of Desmond. Since you had some involvement with the House of Desmond redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  12:05, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Elliott Wright for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elliott Wright 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/Elliott Wright 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. Jamesbuc (talk) 10:18, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Nicole Bass (television personality) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nicole Bass (television personality) 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/Nicole Bass (television personality) 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. Jamesbuc (talk) 10:19, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Zahida Allen for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Zahida Allen 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/Zahida Allen 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. Jamesbuc (talk) 10:41, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

undo Savely Moiseevich Feinberg page[edit]

Dear Boleyn thanks for your efforts and care about the page Savely Moiseevich Feinberg, by moving it to drafts. I add some references to boost the reliability of this page. How can I move this page to normal one? Best regards

Done ☑Y Boleyn (talk) 18:25, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

China White Paper[edit]

Thanks for assessing China White Paper as stub, no footnotes. There's been a lot more work since then. Could you re-assess? Cheers! ch (talk) 23:28, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for all your hard work on this, it's no longer tagged for anything and I approved it to be indexed by Google. Boleyn (talk) 10:38, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Onward and upward! Keep up the good work... ch (talk) 21:51, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019[edit]

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hello Boleyn,

Backlog

Instead of reaching a magic 300 as it once did last year, the backlog approaching 6,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Coordinator

A proposal is taking place here to confirm a nominated user as Coordinator of NPR.

This month's refresher course

Why I Hate Speedy Deleters, a 2008 essay by long since retired Ballonman, is still as valid today. Those of us who patrol large numbers of new pages can be forgiven for making the occasional mistake while others can learn from their 'beginner' errors. Worth reading.

Deletion tags

Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon (you will need to have 'Nominated for deletion' enabled for this in your filters) may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders using Twinkle. They require your further verification.

Paid editing

Please be sure to look for the tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. WMF policy requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines' (SNG). Alternatives to deletion
  • Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves once more with notability guidelines for organisations and companies.
  • Blank-and-Redirect is a solution anchored in policy. Please consider this alternative before PRODing or CSD. Note however, that users will often revert or usurp redirects to re-create deleted articles. Do regularly patrol the redirects in the feed.
Not English
  • A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, and if they do have potential, tag as required, then move to draft. Modify the text of the template as appropriate before sending it.
Tools

Regular reviewers will appreciate the most recent enhancements to the New Pages Feed and features in the Curation tool, and there are still more to come. Due to the wealth of information now displayed by ORES, reviewers are strongly encouraged to use the system now rather than Twinkle; it will also correctly populate the logs.

Stub sorting, by SD0001: A new script is available for adding/removing stub tags. See User:SD0001/StubSorter.js, It features a simple HotCat-style dynamic search field. Many of the reviewers who are using it are finding it an improvement upon other available tools.

Assessment: The script at User:Evad37/rater makes the addition of Wikiproject templates extremely easy. New page creators rarely do this. Reviewers are not obliged to make these edits but they only take a few seconds. They can use the Curation message system to let the creator know what they have done.

DannyS712 bot III is now patrolling certain categories of uncontroversial redirects. Curious? Check out its patrol log.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

You might be interested[edit]

as to meta:User_talk:Fram#2019_report_to_T&S:LouisAlain. Best, WBGconverse 05:58, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Sorry mate[edit]

Hey, Boleyn. My name used to be I-CANT-THINK-OF-USERNAME!, if by any chance you can remember. Back in 2017, I created a lot of unnotable and unreferenced articles, which always had to be fixed by you. You warned me a bunch of times on my talk page, but I didn't even know ideas talk pages existed. Just saying sorry for being a pain... :/ Melofors (talk) 21:55, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Meofors, don't worry, I once went through a spate of creating unreferenced articles years ago despite being asked to stop - we all change our editing as time goes on. Welcome back! Boleyn (talk) 05:37, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

William Jephson (died 1698)[edit]

Hello, this article has the hallmarks of being automatically created (e.g., with a script) that has malfunctioned - e.g., strangely incomplete fields and incorrectly formatted links (in this version). So, just drawing it to your attention in case there's something you need to fix. I've made a couple of minor edits but it hasn't resolved all the problems - thanks. QuiteUnusual (talk) 13:14, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll have a look. Boleyn (talk) 19:36, 19 September 2019 (UTC)