User talk:Superastig/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/21 High Street Doha

Hi. There was no consensus to merge. The policy based responses were to delete. Please reconsider and revert your close. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:18, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm afraid I cannot. Two editors voted to "merge" its content to the respective target because they believed that it's not notable enough to warrant a standalone article and therefore is a valid WP:ATD. Therefore, I don't see a reason for me to revert my closure. ASTIG️🎉 _{(HAPPY 2023)} 16:00, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Deletion review for 21 High Street Doha

An editor has asked for a deletion review of 21 High Street Doha. 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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:04, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Reconsidering the close for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Badnaseeb (2nd nomination)

Hey, I think you made the wrong call in closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Badnaseeb (2nd nomination) given that keep !voters were never able to substantiate an actual case for how notability guidelines were met (as well as the prevalence of SPA IPs on the keep side). I'd ask you to reconsider your decision to NAC the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:49, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm afraid I cannot. I know that the "keep" votes are weak, but they still have merit whatsoever. And I don't see enough consensus for it to be deleted or redirected either. Therefore, I don't see a reason for me to revert my closure. ASTIG️🎉 _{(HAPPY 2023)} 01:27, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Deletion review for Badnaseeb

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Badnaseeb. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:53, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy Fourteenth First Edit Day!

Thanks. ASTIG️🎉 _{(HAPPY 2023)} 13:06, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey, Superastig. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 20:25, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Belfield (4th nomination)

Hi, I've undone your close of this AfD. For the rationale, see the relist comment. The BLP1E argument came late in the discussion, but merits to be addressed. --Randykitty (talk) 15:27, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Superastig non-admin AfD closes. Thank you. To be clear, I have proposed to topic ban you from closing AfDs. Flatscan (talk) 05:22, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

AfD trouble

Tough luck bud. I'm kinda disappointed with the outcomes of those 2 DRVs. What you received was a double kill, make that triple kill because someone reported you to the AN. SBKSPP (talk) 23:35, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

So am I. Since the time I was scolded months ago in a previous discussion, I've been careful in picking which discussion to close and, believe me or not, those closures are really well-thought. Yet, a lot of editors seem to get triggered with some of my closures. Of almost 300 closures I've done for the past year, less than 10 of them were either overturned or relisted. I can't even believe an editor is making a big deal out of such. It's outright ridiculous. As for Badnaseeb, had anyone identified the sockpuppet IPs in the first place, then I wouldn't have touched the discussion at all. ASTIG😎🙃 18:09, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

As a closer, you are expected to disregard opinions and comments if they feel that there is strong evidence that they were not made in good faith. Such "bad faith" opinions include those being made by sock puppets, or accounts created solely for voting on the deletion discussion. That AfD had two IPs geolocating to the same place, making the same poorly-supported arguments with the same glaring English deficits, and had already been flagged as SPAs. It should not take someone else formally tagging them as socks for you to recognize they needed to be discounted (not to mention their arguments were strongly rebutted). You also closed three AfDs after participants had been blocked for socking, including one where a sock's !vote had already been struck. If you can't identify obvious bad-faith !voting you should not be closing dicussions. JoelleJay (talk) 22:45, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Regarding You also closed three AfDs after participants had been blocked for socking, including one where a sock's !vote had already been struck.:

I even discarded those "keep" votes in the deletion discussions of "list of songs...". I even know they violate WP:NOT. Sheesh. ASTIG😎🙃 13:09, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

So you've unilaterally decided that singular !votes for redirect should always override majority consensus for deletion, despite this not being policy-backed and such discussions being inherently inappropriate for NAC? JoelleJay (talk) 17:36, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

It's based on my experiences when I usually casted votes in various discussions before. Take example of these discussions:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christmas Day in the_Morning (Tabernacle Choir album)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ankhiyon Ke Jharokhon Se (Song)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Another Sleepless Night (album)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dissection (album)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/What Are We Waiting For
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bridge over Troubled Dreams
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tu Jaane Na
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/All the Rage (EP)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Surface (Aero Chord song)

Of 1 or more "delete" votes in those discussions, I was the only one who voted for a "redirect". And all were closed as "redirect", with some of the closers mentioning WP:ATD. The closers of these respective discussions believe that it's never a mortal sin to use ATDs. Same case for this discussion, where only one voted for a "redirect". That said, those discussion indicated serve as my guide when it comes to closing various AfDs. ASTIG😎🙃 07:24, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Superastig I do agree with you. I believe most of your closures are right. It's just that some noms would rather send their booboos to the DRV than accept the results. But reporting you to the AN just because of the 7 challenged closures that are overturned/relisted takes their booboos to the next level. It's like an Asian parent getting mad at his kid for getting a 90-something in an exam instead of 100. LOL. SBKSPP (talk) 22:45, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I can't do anything about it if they decided to take any of my closures to the DelRev. It's part of freedom. I found it a bit bothering at first, but I've been used to that for months. ASTIG😎🙃 22:27, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm kinda disappointed that the consensus came out that way. I'm sure my fellow opposers are too. Consider yourself lucky that you still have the right to vote in AfDs. SBKSPP (talk) 01:23, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, it sucks. Big time. I find it too much. I'm sure they're celebrating their victory about me being banned from closing deletion discussions. I can still cast votes on any of them, but because of that, I've lost my appetite to do such. This makes me want to take a break from AfDs. So much for a bad Valentine's day present. Sheesh. ASTIG😎🙃 06:03, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

I know you feel bad the way I felt bad when a lot of my articles were thrown into the trash. Glad I was able to reinvent my use by participating in AfDs. But I still feel dissatisfied with just that. With the recent BS happening against you, I suggest you take a break for at least a few days or a week. SBKSPP (talk) 08:54, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, but no thanks. I only take a long break whenever I'd be out for a long trip or holiday, but not whenever I get into these kinds of trouble. Life goes on.

I've created tons of articles for various scopes. An article about a radio station was sent to AfD a few years ago, which caused me to be involved in deletion discussions. Now that I decided to stay away from AfDs (for a while), aside from creating articles, I'll focus on mopping the floor. ASTIG😎🙃 16:03, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Glad you have other uses in Wikipedia at least. As for me, I'll stick to voting on AfDs. Unless it's the right time for me to create another article. I don't wanna close AfDs coz I might have the same fate as a bold closer like you. Hehe. SBKSPP (talk) 08:31, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

And speaking of the Fatih Mehmet Gul DRV, I'm disappointed that it was overturned to delete. A lot of editors would rather take the shortcut than start a fresh AfD. SBKSPP (talk) 08:55, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Honestly, they should've renominated it in the 1st place rather than waste their time sending it to the DelRev. You're right that it's pointless since it's been a month since I closed it. Renomination makes more sense in a way to get rid of sockpuppetry in the first discussion. ASTIG😎🙃 10:03, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Question

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Superastig_non-admin_AfD_closes

Hi.

I have a question for you.

Why have you not engaged in the Administrators' noticeboard discussion concerning your AfD closures?

I now have this talk page on my watchlist.

I look forward to your response. - jc37 06:00, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

What is there for me to argue about? I've been reading their comments from time to time, but I don't think I'm required to participate in that discussion like I barely participated in the DelRevs of any of my closures. Unless I have anything worth saying there, I'll remain speechless about their comments about me. ASTIG😎🙃 16:21, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't appear that way to other editors. They'll think you don't care about their concerns and are purposefully ignoring them, which is why they're supporting a topic ban and aren't exactly agreeing with my proposal for a warning. You need to appear there to show that you aren't ignoring their concerns. That's just my recommendation. — Nythar (💬-❄️) 07:14, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

If you say so, I'll try to think of something worthy for me to say in the discussion. I may include what I said here.

Just to let you know that some of the editors involved in the discussion are subscribed to a part of my talk page. ASTIG😎🙃 10:48, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately, a consensus has been made before I had the chance to break my silence. Anyway. I'm thinking of making an appeal someday, but not for this time being. Possible in a few months. ASTIG😎🙃 13:06, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Your weakness is your reticence to explain yourself. When closing discussions, it is not good enough to be right, you have to be comprehensible by the uninitiated newcomer, and if challenged, or merely asked a question, you have to treat them seriously, humour them them if you must. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:39, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Editing restriction

Following my closure of this discussion at WP:AN, I am informing you that you are now subject to an topic ban, restricting you from closing AfD discussions. You may still take part in those discussions as a regular contributor, but you may no longer close them. The restriction is indefinite, but may be appealed at AN no sooner than six months from today. This restriction is recorded at WP:EDRC. Thank you. Girth Summit _(blether) 12:31, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Any guide on how I can appeal that topic ban? I'm planning to do so in the near future within 6 months. Thanks in advance. ASTIG😎🙃 13:09, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

You go to WP:AN, and start a new thread entitled something like 'Appeal of my topic ban'. Link to the original discussion that led to the ban (you can simply copy the permalink that I posted in my message above), and explain why you feel that the ban should be rescinded (ideally by describing how you would act differently in future). I'd advise you to do your best to demonstrate plenty of competence in the area between now and any appeal, so that people will be well-disposed towards lifting the ban. Best Girth Summit _(blether) 13:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

• Just a suggestion from me... In your forthcoming appeal, simply agree to change your response when a close is challenged. Instead of arguing that you're right (which you might well be) and making the challenger go to DRV, just revert it. If a close is challenged, that means it wasn't completely uncontroversial and maybe shouldn't have been a NAC, so just undo it and leave it to an admin? It would only apply to a small number of closes, and would leave you free to continue with all the good ones. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:55, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

  You made me realize that I've taken freedom too far. Whenever anyone takes any of my closures to the DelRev, I thought that it's their problem and not mine. I didn't expect that this kind of mindset would create a negative impact on my contributions. ASTIG😎🙃 16:30, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

  I did not respond earlier, because others have well enough. But I thought I would offer a few policy links, which you may find helpful.

  First, the context that you link to freedom, is concerning. You may wish to check out WP:NOTFREESPEECH. We're all merely Wikipedians here at the service of building an encyclopedia. Nothing more.

  Second, if you are going to do "Non-admin closures", you fall under all the restrictions laid out at WP:ADMIN. Which includes WP:ADMINACCT. If you are going to close any discussion, then please understand that responding to good-faithed "requests for clarification" is a way of life. At any time, if you do not think you are comfortable responding to such a request, don't close the discussion in the first place. Yes, if you read the top of my talk page, you'll see some comments from (imnsho) some of the best closers we've ever had on Wikipedia. So yes, it is not uncommon that someone coming to ask you about a close is merely trying to "re-litigate" the close. But for you as a closer, the challenge is to be able to read past whatever enthusiasm, emotion, or even vitriol, and see if there is a valid point there to re-assess your close. User:Boing! said Zebedee makes good points above, but in a sense, that could also be seen as just dodging things by saying "well, I'm not an admin, so I'll revert" - which, in and of itself, could also be concerning.

  And finally, please take a moment and read User:Jc37/RfA/Criteria. The last few sentences may also help clarify.

  Anyway, I say all of this in hopes to help. That it could perhaps help you develop into being a better closer.

  (Yes, I took a lengthy tour of your edit history and closes. But no, I'm not going to comment on that experience at this time - I think we should just move forward from the past.)

  And I too am just another Wikipedian here. But if it helps, I've been involved with discussions, closures, and community consensus, off-n-on for well nigh 16 years, and have closed or help closed some of the most contentious discussions on Wikipedia (User:Jc37/Awards notes a few). I only mention this, so you don't think I'm merely "piling on" to the recent discussion. And yes, you not commenting there, did not do you any favours.

  Anyway, like I said, this is merely intended to help. Perhaps later, once the sting of recent events has faded a bit, this may help. (Or not, whatever the case may be : )

  In any case, I wish you well. - jc37 17:39, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks. I'll take note of what you said, including the others above. I'll make sure I keep those in mind, especially whenever I'm ready to make an appeal. ASTIG😎🙃 06:06, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Deletion review for Fatih Mehmet Gul

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Fatih Mehmet Gul. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

February 2023

Hello @Superastig. I want to apologize for reverting your edits, I have read the MOS already, however, some things are still not yet clear to me. Is there a explicit statement in the MOS regarding the sub-section headers? If there is none, what is the reason why shouldn't put headers like "People related..."? Again, my apologies. Thank you! - jampol 08:34, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

It's based on my experience as a contributor on Philippine TV series. A few years ago, I tried applying the sub-header format in an article of a defunct TV series (I can't remember what series was that), but it was reverted by a veteran editor who told me that this kind of format for cast list is much neater and smaller per size. As for the term "People related to" and the likes, they're considered WP:FANCRUFT and not necessarily needed per WP:CASTLIST. ASTIG😎🙃 12:15, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:VOP Logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:VOP Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:31, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

March 2023

Hello, I just want to ask is you know the new radio station in Baguio 106.5 MHz? I just observed this station two months ago and I cannot determine the stations name and format until now. As of today, the station has no bumpers. SeanJ 2007 (talk) 14:47, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Can it be heard within the entire city and nearby areas including La Trinidad? ASTIG😎🙃 13:03, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

It can be heard within the city (Baguio). In La Trinidad, I don't know. SeanJ 2007 (talk) 13:50, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Hmmm. Keep on observing the station from time to time and if you still can't spot any SID, then it may be considered a pirate. ASTIG😎🙃 07:48, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Marist School (Marikina) deletion

Hello! I was surprised to see this article got redirected to its deletion. Last time I checked, it's the only Marist school article that got deleted. Is it because it's a school in the Philippines? I digress. Anyway, I was active in editing this article in my other account years ago (now in hiatus). Though a year late already, I disagree with the decision so I might make a draft of it in my Sandbox. I can't disagree though if I can't see the argument against the deletion though. I can access books and news articles supporting its notability like I did in the other school articles I edited. Hard to find articles on the school since it gets buried along with the other "Marist". Anyway, let me know if I can still help recover the article, make a draft on a sandbox to bring it back, or just let it stay redirected to its non-existence. Peace! — Brother Allen (talk) 13:51, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Honestly, it doesn't make sense when you said that the article got redirected to its deletion. There are other types of consensus aside from "delete". I closed it as "redirect" not because it's from the Philippines (that's an invalid argument per WP:ATA), but because it fails WP:NSCHOOL based on the consensus in the deletion discussion. We follow policy-based arguments when it comes to such deletion discussion.

Since the page is currently a redirect, its history is preserved. It means anyone like you is free to scan for previous versions of the article. I suggest you read WP:NSCHOOL and WP:GNG before editing the article. If you believe that the school meets either of those said criteria, then look for secondary sources about the school. I hope this answers your concern. ASTIG😎🙃 15:42, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

It answers my concern. I'll try to do what I can do from now on. Thanks! — Brother Allen (talk) 23:50, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

May 2023

Hi, Superastig!

I'm so sorry for that because I wanted to trying added or edited the pages or articles for some Brigada News FM stations in General Santos, Olongapo and Zamboanga that are licensed to Baycomms Broadcasting Corporation without any permission, which already mentioned in that infobox for it's stations.

I hope that I decided to stay longer as a wikipedia user that I created a new one, but next time I will try my best to edit, added or fix information in each articles.

Thank you so much! 😊 Jemz2023 (talk) 09:31, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of DXNG-FM for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article DXNG-FM 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/DXNG-FM 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 until the discussion has finished.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:54, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Onel5969, you nominated the article twice at the same time. I suggest you procedural close either of them and focus on the other. ASTIG😎🙃

Hi. Yeah, I requested an admin to delete one of them. Something went wrong with the Twinkle process.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:43, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

No worries. ASTIG😎🙃 10:45, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The thread is: 112.200.9.54 and perpetuating hoaxes?. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 17:37, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	thanks for editing the dzlc cool fm! Jairus Cambiado Ezekiel (talk) 05:30, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Philippine Collective Media Corporation

Regarding to your revert on Special:Diff/1159739033, the station already exists. The station already has a FB page (facebook.com/fmrquezon94.3). I restored the revert. ThisIsSeanJ (talk) 03:14, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

If you insist. A certain IP user who inserted that info should've added an edit summary about the station's existence in the first place. ASTIG😎🙃 09:54, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ben Balasador

The article Ben Balasador has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NFILM. Citations are about the actors, except the book...which may or may not contain an depth review.

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. DonaldD23 talk to me 02:10, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

July 2023

Hello, where is the source that 105.1 Baguio will be simulcast Brigada Korondal? ThisIsSeanJ (talk) 01:18, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

It's part of the station's test broadcast, which included a simulcast of BNFM Koronadal's program. Not to mention technicians from BNFM visited the transmitter site a couple of months ago. ASTIG😎🙃 04:27, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Can you tell me the timestamp on that video where they announce that they will simulcast on 105.1 Baguio? LOL the video is too long that's why. And as of now 105.1 Baguio is silent. ThisIsSeanJ (talk) 04:55, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

I just saw it in an FB group, but whoever posted it didn't provide a timestamp aside from a comment about it. Perhaps, the testing was done yesterday. Maybe the following days as well. Who knows? ASTIG😎🙃 10:06, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello again, do you know when is the exact launch of 105.1 Baguio? In DZBM it says there 1999, in DWBM-FM under the Crossover section, it says 2000. ThisIsSeanJ (talk) 06:01, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

It's 2000, based on the newspaper indicated in both articles. ASTIG😎🙃 10:03, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Edit warring on Ang Syota Kong Balikbayan

Hello @Superastig, you are now engaged in an edit war with me on the Ang Syota Kong Balikbayan page. I have explained to you why I reverted your edits. You are in contravention of WP:BRD. After an editor undoes your edit, you are meant to discuss the issue on the talk page, not continually revert back. Your argument so far has been to reference a previous editor's changes, which I supposedly left in place, with the contention that this somehow justifies your changes to remain in place. This is false, as the two are not related. You have introduced erroneous terminology into the article—title role—even though I explained that it is not applicable. Additionally, you have made the claim that imdb is verified, which is ridiculous, since it is a user-generated database. You need to stop this conflict and start engaging in a discussion, before this matter requires escalating into a noticeboard dispute. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 12:57, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

You really act as if you own the article. I created the article, but I don't own it. Anyone is free to make contributions, with or without sources. Yet, you seem to get in the way of anyone's contributions to the article.

I have really explained more than enough in my edit summaries. So, I don't see a reason as to why I should start a discussion in the article's talk page. Borgenland made significant changes to the article, including bringing back most of the cast list (that you removed) with some descriptions and expanding the plot. Yet, they didn't provide references regarding their edits, and they didn't engage in a discussion in the talk page about it aside from describing Tino/Tina and you leaving the character description up to them. Borgenland knows what they're doing, and so am I. And it's true no matter what. Even if we argue about this 'til the day we die, my edit in the article stands. So, it's either you leave my edits as is or this issue you started will get worse. The choice is yours. ASTIG😎🙃 15:36, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Just a couple of corrections, for your edification: anyone is not free to make contributions without sources. If you don't know that much, then you clearly don't know what you're doing.

Borgenland engaged in a civil discussion with me, and we reached an agreement. That is how Wikipedia works. Don't compare yourself to Borgenland, because so far, all you've done is revert.

The issue will get worse? That sounds like a threat. I will continue doing my best to improve the article, as will you. If we disagree and you refuse to discuss, as you're meant to, then I will escalate the issue; simple as that. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:11, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

because so far, all you've done is revert: How were my contributions considered reverting when, in fact, I mostly made changes in the cast listing? Common sense, men.

Moving on, I have no qualms about the current presentation of the cast list. though there's a very minor correction I pointed out in the article's talk page. ASTIG😎🙃 00:03, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

• Superastig, the attitude you show in your response here is utterly unacceptable, and I have raised it at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Further battleground problems. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:41, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Indefinitely blocked

Per consensus emerging at ANI (link) regarding your persistent and egregious WP:OWN violations and other behavioural issues, I have indefinitely blocked your account from editing.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Daniel (talk) 04:06, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Unblock Request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Superastig (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

There are times when I have day-offs from Wikipedia at least once a week. Now that I came from my day-off yesterday, I was shocked to see that I'm blocked. I've read the recent replies in my appeal and I admit that I've gone way too far with losing my cool and creating a battleground, just like what happened in Ang Syota Kong Balikbayan, with this affecting my behavior, and I realized that I should not persist on my edits whenever I'm wrong in certain aspects. I apologize. Outside those issues, several of my other edits were done in good faith and in peace, like episode updates of every TV show and creating articles. I've been also reverting disruptive edits from various IP users several times. And I don't want my recent behavior to overshadow my said contributions in Wikipedia. I hope I'll be unblocked. And I'll do my best to be careful with my behavior and tone down my replies this time around. ASTIG😎🙃 01:03, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Decline reason:

First of all, I'm rooting for you, because indeed you have done a lot of good here, and I have seen how much you care about this project. The main reason you were blocked was because of OWNership behavior. Please review it more carefully. You also should not OWN an article even whenever you're "right" in certain aspects. Or even most aspects. Barring vandalism, we have dispute resolution if you feel another's edits are not improving the article. Yes, you need to keep your cool, yes you need to avoid battleground behavior. But you'll need to show a better understanding of the OWN policy before you are unblocked. My recommendation is to try to reflect and figure out what motivates the OWNership reaction in the first place. I truly hope that is helpful. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:19, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

• Superastig, mind if I offer a bit of friendly advice? I can see you have contributed a lot of material to Wikipedia. And, like 78.26, I'd like to see you come back to editing. Firstly, generally, I'd say you need to listen to people a bit more rather than just arguing, and I think you can be a bit impulsive there. It sounds like you understand that from what you say above - but you had several chances to avoid a block over this, and instead of listening you just doubled down and insisted you were right. Anyway, we're here now, so what do you need to do? The main problem I see is ownership, and you really need to read and understand WP:OWN. You said that you found the idea of someone reverting your edits intolerable. But that does not fit in with what Wikipedia requires of editors, and I don't think you will be allowed back unless you can drop that attitude. You must be able to tolerate being reverted. Anyone is allowed to revert anyone else here, and the one who wants to make the change is then expected to discuss it in a civil manner at the article talk page and seek consensus. Consensus decides what goes into articles when there's a disagreement - not you, and not the other editor, but consensus. WP:BRD outlines the way to proceed - it's only an essay, but it's based on core policies and it's widely accepted as good practice. (There are other steps in dispute resolution if that doesn't work, but I don't think we need to go further right now.) So, for an unblock to be successful, I'd say you need to commit to a more civil and less combative approach (done above, good), make it clear how you understand the ownership problem and that anyone can boldly make any edit or revert they want, and explain how you will approach disagreement in future. I wish you well, and I hope that helps. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:05, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the advice. I may have stumbled upon WP:OWN a few times before, but I'll do my best to understand it thoroughly because I'm sure there are some aspects there that I missed out on. ASTIG😎🙃 15:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
• @Superastig: I understand how upset you are knowing that you're blocked. I believe that blocking you indefinitely is outright ridiculous, but we can't do anything about the consensus. Just like the others above, I sometimes observe that you have your WP:OWN problem. I admire your contributions in Wikipedia. But you have to fix your problem first by listening to Boing! said Zebedee and the gang. Once you understand OWN, then you can request for your unblocking in a week or the following weeks when you're ready. Hoping that you can contribute again soon. SBKSPP (talk) 07:24, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

  I don't actually see a consensus to indefinitely block at AN, User:SBKSPP. There were three votes, and this wasn't one of them. There was some chatter at the end, but there was little participation, and didn't seem that a consensus formed. I don't see why any admin couldn't lift this block if they were satisfied. Indefinite does seem a bit strong for a first-ever block for a user whose been here for over 14 years. There was no urgency. Nfitz (talk) 04:28, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

  Indeed, it's not a community block, so any admin can unblock without seeking a consensus. And I hope that will happen once Superastig shows a proper understanding of WP:OWN. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:27, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

  • It doesn't have to be a week, once OWN is understood, you have a chance of success in appeal. starship.paint (exalt) 13:57, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

    I'd concur with the above. Given an ongoing discussion, I'm not sure the indef was necessary (as opposed to the other aspects of the discussion I reviewed), but since we've reached that point (and it would be within a legitimate understanding of the final part of that discussion), I think Boing's suggestions have merit. Nosebagbear (talk) 16:44, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Community TBAN/TBAN appeal moratorium

Hello,

I realise this might feel either somewhat like piling on, but as I think you a likely individual to be unblocked and there was clear community consensus, there were other community consensuses to implement.

The most core of which is a 6 month moratorium from appealing your TBAN on AfD closes. The close can be seen here. I'll also add it to the list shortly. There was affirmative community consensus not to implement a more general AfD TBAN. Nosebagbear (talk) 12:16, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. By the time a consensus was made on my previous appeal a few weeks ago, I wasn't aware that I should appeal again after at least 6 months. ASTIG😎🙃 13:24, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Unblock Request #2

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Superastig (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Per WP:OWN, no one has the right to claim a certain article as their own. Whoever creates a certain article does not mean they own it. Every editor has the right to make changes to that article and, if ever any part of the article questioned, anyone can discuss it in the article's talk page to seek consensus. I realized that my recent involvement in editing Ang Syota Kong Balikbayan is a clear example of WP:OWN, where I went way too far with losing my cool and created a battleground. (No. 6 of WP:OWNBEHAVIOR) I acted as if I own the article by persisting with my edits. And blaming the reverter will not solve the problem. I apologize for such. The next time an editor reverts any of my edits in a certain article for a valid reason, I'll discuss in good faith regarding my edits in the article's talk page and respect whatever consensus we will reach. If I can't find a valid reason for my edits to be restored, instead of boldly standing by my edits and engaging in an edit war, I'll leave the article as is and respect the decision of the reverter. This is how toned down I'll be whenever I encounter such reversion this time around. ASTIG😎🙃 00:36, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Per the discussion with respect to stipulations and existing topic bans, and with the agreement below of the blocking admin. Superastig, don't hesitate to be in touch with any questions or clarifications. Star Mississippi 12:56, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

• Sounds good to me - you've taken your time and understood things properly. I support an unblock. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:00, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
• I also support an unblock. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:09, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
• Superastig, I will note that in the AN thread, editors were concerned that your general conduct was not investigated sooner, leading me to believe that your wiki-behaviour is an ongoing problem. I think your words above show that you understand the problem, and if unblocked your actions are going to show if you truly understand how to avoid this problematic behaviour. If I unblock you, it will be with the understanding that this is your final warning: I will support any admin reblocking you for incivility without a warning. It will be your responsibility to avoid OWN, BATTLEGROUND and UNCIVIL behaviour. The topic-ban for closing AFDs and appealing the closure will still stand. Do you understand and agree to this stipulation?

@Daniel: as the blocking admin, if any concerns with unblocking if Superastig agrees to my stipulation above? Z1720 (talk) 19:26, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

None at all. I fully support an unblock given the above. Daniel (talk) 21:36, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

I understand and agree to your stipulation. From hereon, I'll do my best to be civil in every contribution and give my replies in good faith to avoid being blocked again. ASTIG😎🙃 05:50, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Welcome back :-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:11, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I will not waste my second chance this time around. ASTIG😎🙃 15:51, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Welcome back my friend! Rhianna543 (talk) 15:54, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for the late response. Had to focus on some family matters. But anyway, welcome back. I hope you maintain your peaceful attitude for years to come. SBKSPP (talk) 00:22, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

August 2023

Astig, last time there's a edit war on Eat Bulaga and the username is Jumark27. He even reverted and change content as he owns the article as per WP:OWN. Maybe you have to report to the administrators. I know you're not involved in it but I'm just telling you about happening last time. Please take your time to response this. Thank you Astig! Rhianna543 (talk) 06:55, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Read rule #1 of this talk page. ASTIG😎🙃 10:27, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Ok thanks Rhianna543 (talk) 16:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Centerstage

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

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG. Tagged for notability since 2020

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. DonaldD23 talk to me 22:29, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Papunta Ka Pa Lang, Pabalik Na Ako

Hello, Superastig, and welcome to Wikipedia. I edit here too, under the username Chris troutman, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Papunta Ka Pa Lang, Pabalik Na Ako, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Papunta Ka Pa Lang, Pabalik Na Ako.

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. 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|Chris troutman}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

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

Chris Troutman (talk) 15:50, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Superastig. Thank you for your work on Talahib at Rosas. User:DreamRimmer, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Good work!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|DreamRimmer}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 ^{𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜} 16:42, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Autopatrolled granted

Hi Superastig, 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! œ^™ 08:03, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of WJDI

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

Does not meet the WP:GNG.

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. Let'srun (talk) 03:57, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Senior High

Why are you removing coming of age and thriller on genre in the info box. Abs cbn entertainment article said coming of age. Other official sources say mystery thriller so it shouldn’t be removed. 120.28.249.22 (talk) 15:28, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Coming-of-age usually falls under "teen drama" banner. So, it sounds vague if they're joined together. And "mystery thriller" is considered as "mystery". So, it's best for you to leave the "genre" section as is than to make things complicated by adding more genres. Two will suffice. It's that simple. ASTIG😎🙃 16:09, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Alright. But I think it’s normal to have more genres. Like how US tv series has a lot of genres from the main genre. 120.28.249.22 (talk) 13:41, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

It's not normal for TV series (set aside anthologies) to have multiple genres. Elements from various genres are incorporated to every TV series, but it manages to maintain its main genres. ASTIG😎🙃 15:18, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Kapit sa patalim

I heard you've been doing this episode update task for a very long time. I hope you don't mind if I have a chat with you here.

We all know that kapit sa patalim literally means holding on to a knife's blade, but it's generaly means taking a risk. Apologies for not inserting translations, but I believe everyone agrees that kapit sa patalim really means taking a risk. There's no need for sources about it. What bothers me is that HW reverted my edit on Lovers / Liars yesterday. I plan to bring back what's right, but NVM.

And why did HW escalate this issue about the kapit sa patalim into the reference used in episode updates? Ever since I started doing episode update task, I haven't received such useless warning until yesterday. They seem to act as if they're right. Kutsero (talk) 03:11, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

They're like that. We can't do anything about it. I suggest you read this issue from months ago and a recent allegation against me. I hope these will answer your concerns. I'd rather not explain about it any further. Thanks for believing in what's right, though. ASTIG😎🙃 16:30, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the links. I'll take my time to read them. I'll dig deeper into this problem you're dragged into as well. I know someone else started the episode title updates on TV shows many years ago and other users like you followed. Kutsero (talk) 03:16, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

I understand that you're not interested in the discussion anymore, but I realize that HW is the problem, and not you or anyone involved in episode title updates or episode list creations. My research about this gave me a pain in the arsenal. Though my only concern is about sources of ratings only, I believe you're telling the truth in most parts of the incident. Kutsero (talk) 02:12, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for late reply. I wanted to reply on the thread you mentioned. But it was already archived. I've been busy with work. That's why I usually log in once or twice a week. And I can't believe they reverted one of my edits and cried in my talk page. As if they claim them as their territory. Whatever happens, no one can stop me, or you or any other user. Kutsero (talk) 08:24, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Okay what is this crying all about? I approached you in your talk page to discuss the issue properly and you just ignored what I said. Wikipedia:Canvassing is against the rules. And you saying that "no can stop you, SuperAstig or any other user". Wikipedia is a collaborative website. That attitude won't go well to the administrators if you are reported. TheHotwiki (talk) 08:37, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

I may have read your messages in my talk page. But not answering them does not mean I ignore them. I have the right to decide if I'll reply to your messages or not. And I chose not to reply to them. So you have no choice but to respect my decision. Kutsero (talk) 08:50, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Yet you appear to be canvassing in this talk page. Like I said Wikipedia is a collaborative website. If you have a problem regarding about me reverting your edits, you can directly respond to my messages in your talk page, rather than going to Superastig's talk page. Since you were obviously talking about me in this talk page of another editor, I responded. TheHotwiki (talk) 08:58, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Call this canvassing or whatever you like. It's not my problem. I just wanna have a chat with them here. There's nothing wrong with that, right? And why should I message you re: my edit you reverted? You'll refuse to listen to me anyway. Kutsero (talk) 09:08, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

I messaged you politely in your talk page and this is actually the first time you responded in my talk page messages (which happened in a talk page of another editor). You accussed me of "crying" in your talk page, accused me of "claiming a territory". If you are here to chat SuperAstig, then thats completely fine but if you're going to attack me in someone's talk page, then thats not going to sit well, especially if you're reported in resorting to personal attacks. TheHotwiki (talk) 09:30, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

If you're gonna keep reverting any of our edits in episode lists in every GMA series instead of letting them be, then that's not going to sit well either. Kutsero (talk) 10:32, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Your edit as of today was reverted once by me, and it was reverted for a reason. Canvassing and resorting to personal attacks are actual offenses in Wikipedia. Consider this as your warning. TheHotwiki (talk) 13:47, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Leave the thread as is. We can't do anything about it, now that it's already archived. ASTIG😎🙃 11:32, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

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) 00:36, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of DYHH for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article DYHH 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/DYHH 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 until the discussion has finished.

MarioGom (talk) 19:37, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of DYDD for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article DYDD 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/DYDD 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 until the discussion has finished.

MarioGom (talk) 19:39, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of DWIM-AM for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article DWIM-AM 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/DWIM-AM 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 until the discussion has finished.

MarioGom (talk) 20:09, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of DZPA-FM for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article DZPA-FM 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/DZPA-FM 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 until the discussion has finished.

MarioGom (talk) 20:19, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Batang Quiapo (TV series) Cast and characters

Hello my friend! Can you update the all cast of Batang Quiapo? thanks! PurpleGirl Yedda (talk) 01:42, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society

Dear Superastig/Archive 7,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more. ​

Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 13:39, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Done adding the 15-year infobox to my page. ASTIG😎🙃 10:06, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Belated Happy First Edit Day

Belated happy anniversary in Wikipedia! As of recent, I noticed that a lot of radio/TV station articles have been sent to the AfD, including a couple of my creations, and ended up with "redirect" as their consensus. SBKSPP (talk) 01:13, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I can't believe someone is performing a saturation drive on articles of Philippine radio and TV stations. And it sucks - big time - that most of them ended up getting redirected. This welcomed 2024 in a bad way. Until now, I'm still upset that WP:BCAST isn't given the status of an WP:SNG. Deep in my mind, I'm crying over those affected pages. ASTIG😎🙃 15:30, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Removed Lock 🔐

Hello could you plls remove the lock for the Wikipedia page of (Miss La Union I need to edit something thank you. Agri-tista5q (talk) 05:20, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

My correction edit for DYAC-FM broadcasting history

Dear Superastig!

I would like to fix or edit the article for DYAC-FM broadcasting history because I really need to rephrased a couple of sentences about the transfer of Brigada News FM Cebu's operations to 90.7 MHz from the former frequency, 93.1 MHz.

According to DJ Paul Gee that announced on May 13, 2023, I've already heard and/or seen the video of Rigor Mortiz's YT channel regarding Brigada News FM Cebu was conducted a test broadcast on 90.7 FM from 9pm to 7am the next day and from 1-3pm starting last May 15 of the same year, conincides with the transfer of it's broadcast facilities and offices to V. Rama Ave., Brgy. Guadalupe (near Nissan), until final sign-off of Q Radio Cebu on this frequency at midnight of June 17.

Please don't revert it because I'd like to edit or fix the history of Brigada News FM Cebu's transition to this frequency for the last chance. Thank you very much and God bless you always! ImlinaAbanato1995 (talk) 11:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

No need to rephrase that part because what you stated is just the same as your edit. The recent edit in the article makes more sense, compared to your edit, which has a few grammar issues ("which transfer of" doesn't make any sense). So, it's best for you to leave it as is than to waste your time persisting on your edits. Simple as that. ASTIG😎🙃 14:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

I have ask questions for you, can I remove redundancy that part as I'll edit in the article for DYAC-FM from it's history ("Prior to its transfer, Brigada News FM was previously on 93.1 FM")? Hoping that you'll answer. ImlinaAbanato1995 (talk) 15:49, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

There's nothing redundant about that line. There's nothing wrong with the history section. Like I said, leave the section as is. No buts, no complaints. Just do it. Simple as that. ASTIG😎🙃 01:21, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

"Chicks on the Right" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Chicks on the Right has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 1 § Chicks on the Right until a consensus is reached. Star Mississippi 18:15, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

What is your problem?

I've noticed you keep changing[1][2] the translation for "Ang Pinili ni Jordan" for NO given reason, which is obvious "The Choice of Jordan" in English language. Do you really want this to escalate again, by bringing administrators/editors for a simple translation? Hotwiki (talk) 11:23, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

"Jordan's choice" is just the same as "the choice of Jordan". The former makes more sense, even other editors will believe in that. I've experienced that years ago. So, don't make this simple translation a big deal. That won't get you anywhere. ASTIG😎🙃 13:00, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

"The Choice of Jordan" isn't grammatically wrong and if its the same, then you shouldn't edit warring for such a simple translation. Again, The Choice of Jordan is a direct translation to those words. You changing the order of the words, making 2 words than 4, and adding an apostrophe isn't a direct translation. It is merely your preference, so stop. Hotwiki (talk) 13:48, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

"Jordan's choice" isn't grammatically wrong as well. Translation does not mean direct word-for-word conversion into English by machine. A little common sense is needed. And it's not required to have a source for that translation. Regardless of order, "Jordan's choice" still makes sense. I'll restore my edit. And it's best for you to leave my edit as is than to waste your time making a big deal out of it. Simple as that. ASTIG😎🙃 16:42, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Uhm. The direct transition of Ang Pinili ni Jordan is What Jordan Chose, not any of your translations. Can't believe you both are fighting over one small thing. Kutsero (talk) 03:07, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Ratings

I wanna post ratings of TV shows? Thing is I don't know where to find them aside from FB or Twitter. Can you help me? Thank you. Kutsero (talk) 03:02, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

I recommend GMA Network's website and LionHearTV, where they occasionally post ratings. And refrain from using anything from Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. I won't be responsible any of your edits. ASTIG😎🙃 04:51, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:DYPH-FM

Hello, Superastig. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "DYPH-FM".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:04, 23 March 2024 (UTC)