User talk:De728631/2018

Unikkatil article

Hi. Can you please review the Unikkatil page? Are you okay with it if the tags are removed? If not please let me know what else would you recommend be done. Thanks! JoeTBA (talk) 04:03, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, thank you for improving this page. I removed the maintenance tags, but marked the article as a stub. This should encourage other editors to expand the article and add more details and general information. De728631 (talk) 21:52, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Talk page

but you did not say :"After six months, your talk page access will be restored so you can make a regular request for unblock if you so wish." [1]?--LivioAndronico ^(talk) 20:24, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

@Livioandronico2013: Thank you for the reminder. I didn't forget about you, and you can now use your Commons talk page again. De728631 (talk) 20:32, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 20:37, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:47, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Danke, Gerda! De728631 (talk) 12:43, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Draft!

Hey, I made a page for a journalist in India.. but I understand my language was inappropriate after I published it.. I am only learning, since its my first week on wikipedia. However, my page was deleted twice..

I have edited the page, making it neutral and now understand how to page works.

Can you help me if the draft is okay? Because I couldn't find the option to move the draft to a live page!

Warm Regards, Hiral Shah. Email - shahhirral@gmail.com Shahhirral (talk) 20:49, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Shahhirral. The article first needs to be reviewed by other editors. Once the reviewer thinks it is ready for publication in the main article space, they will move it there. I can't do this though because I'm not part of the draft articles project. I have added a notice though that will ask reviewers to check your writing. The language/wording is much better now, but I fear you will need more secondary sources to stress out Kumar's notability. And I'm afraid the "Miscallaneous" section is totally irrelevant for an encyclopedia. Regards, De728631 (talk) 20:59, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Hello ord Minas12345 (talk) 01:58, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Why, thank you! De728631 (talk) 02:00, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Party Express - US Manufacturer of Party Supplies

Absolutely accept different admins take different views as to CSD, but the only source, of two, that works is written by them. And it supports the statement "They currently manufacture and stock approximately 10,000 unique items for both seasonal and theme based events and parties". And that's not promotional? KJP1 (talk) 00:18, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

@KJP1: Yes, the phrase is promotional, but the purpose of the draft namespace is to let people edit and improve their drafts until they are ready for the live article namespace. This may also include promotional texts that need to be changed. The current draft was declined several times, so there is no chance that this version will ever go live anyway. And the text in general is not exclusively promotional as CSD G11 requires. De728631 (talk) 15:57, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Coat of Arms of Saskatchewan.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:11, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Nanopowerbangladesh

Hi, just to let you know I translated via google and I see it as unambiguous advertising. It's a sales pitch, with a call to action (contact the user) at the end. Cheers, 18:59, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

@Dlohcierekim: Hi, I had a glimpse at Google Translator too and I didn't find the sandbox outright promotional. The same text did appear on the user page with contact details at the bottom though, and that's why I blanked that page. Anyhow, the account is blocked and won't probably return. De728631 (talk) 12:17, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Need translation of a scanned document Suggestion

I noticed your name on Wikipedia:Translators available#German-to-English and was hoping you could translate the text on the image to the right. I know a little German, but the cursive script is difficult for me to read. Would you be willing to translate it? Thank you!! datumizer  ☎  14:17, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Ok, I'll have a look. I'm going to add this at the file page. De728631 (talk) 14:21, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

 Done @Datumizer: I could read most of it but sometimes the handwriting was just too garbled to make any sense of it, or the meaning of the notes was ambiguous. De728631 (talk) 14:52, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! datumizer ☎ 15:09, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Avola

A user has resumed edit warring on Avola after it's protected status was removed. 174.70.83.194 (talk) 21:24, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

And we're back at semi-protection. If this continues, I might seek a range-block for certain IPs. De728631 (talk) 22:35, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, De728631. 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)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, De728631. 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)

St Marys Draft

Hi,

Thank you for your welcome message. As suggested, could you proofread my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:St_Mary%27s_School,_Gerrards_Cross from a neutral perspective to ensure its not biased?

Elderpoptarts (talk) 21:16, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi Elderpoptarts, I'm afraid I'm not a reviewer in the articles for creation project, so I can't officially rate your draft. It does look alright to me in terms of neutrality. However, I can't see how it would survive the test of Wikipedia:Notability. The references you added are either affiliated with the school or only mention it in passing or trivial newsfeeds. In fact I couldn't find any mentioning at all in the "British History" and "British Library" websites. De728631 (talk) 21:31, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for having a look. I've been battling with the notability situation for a while - It's a lot better than it was, none of the references are affiliated with the school directly. I'm really struggling to find the information elsewhere as it's a small school with little written about it that wasn't written by themselves if you know what I mean? It does mention it in the british history article, the library one was more general so have decided to take it out. I'm not sure what more I can do apart from keep looking for references? Elderpoptarts (talk) 21:44, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Ok, I think I've found the part where it is mentioned in the British History page, but that is just in passing, it's nothing substantial. So as it seems, this school is in fact too small and insignificant to be included in Wikipedia. Notability for organisations is usually established by feature articles in nationwide news and repeated in-depth coverage by reliable sources. This doesn't seem to have happened here yet. De728631 (talk) 21:51, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

This is true. But many other independent schools in the area have Wikipedia pages with far less substantial references so how did they get through? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elderpoptarts (talk • contribs) 22:09, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

I guess these articles were either written before we had the draft system, or in a time when we had far more lenient requirements for school articles. The notability criteria for schools were changed some time ago. Before that we had a consensus that all secondary schools were automatically considered notable, so there are still a lot of articles left that were never thoroughly evaluated after the introduction of the stricter school criteria. De728631 (talk) 22:16, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Ok that makes sense. Thank you for all your help. Elderpoptarts (talk) 22:20, 6 December 2018 (UTC)