User talk:Macdonald-ross/Archive 21

← Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22 →

Mya (unit)

Just letting you know that I removed a sentence you added to this article: the one about the format preferred on this wiki. That is called a self reference, and shouldn't be in the text of any articles. One way to understand why is to remember that Wikipedia articles can be copied to other places: if this article got copied elsewhere with that sentence, it might not be true for that other place. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:50, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Pages imported to Wiktionary

Hello! I had restored one, Air draft, as I hope to contest the deletion, as I believe that page should be represented on both Wikipedia and Wiktionary (not with the same content). Anyways, I noticed that there were multiple other pages involved, so I'm going to hold off on restoring all of them in case there's something I'm missing. Thanks, Vermont (talk) 12:55, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

That's fine. I believe such terms belong in a general article about nautical terms, or terms describing ships. If set as individual pages they do not seem to make a proper article. Although there are certainly some terms which deserve individual pages, the essence of an encyclopedia is that it contains articles rather than dictionary items. In the beginning, wikt was set up to provide a solution to this issue. However, there may be legitimate differences of opinion here... Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:10, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Vermont pinged me on my talk page on this issue, please do provide your comments there, thanks! --Hydriz (talk) 15:48, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Reham Khan

Hi, you deleted this article Reham Khan. Can you please tell me how is it not notable? It had a large number of references which prove the notability. Knightrises10 (talk) 18:48, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

You have to 1) clearly claim the person is notable, and 2) provide independent evidence from qualified sources as to their notability. I make no judgements, just tick off whether or not the needed information is in the article. Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:13, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

They meet both of your criteria. QD-A4 is designed for pages such as one whose only content is "john is a kid from high school", or something else with obviously no claim. It is not for pages like this, which has 18 references, most of which explicitly identify the subject, and almost all of which are reliable and well-known. Vermont (talk) 19:20, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Restore of Reham Khan

Hello. I restored the article as it does have a claim. It may not be notable, but it definitely does have a claim, and cannot be QD'd. Thanks, Vermont (talk) 19:14, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

I also just restored Baadshah (1999 Film). Please, in the future, send articles like that to RfD. It has a claim, and has an article on 11 other Wikipedias. A4 is NOT for articles you think are not notable. They are for articles with no claim at all. Thank you, Vermont (talk) 15:55, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Geranium deletion

I noticed that you QDed geranium as unsimplified from English Wikipedia. Although the article was from English Wikipedia, I had simplified it somewhat already and had planned on doing more when the article was deleted. Clearly, the simplifications that I had already done were not enough. Is it technically possible to restore the article in my userspace so that I could work on it more? If it is, would you be able to do that? Thanks. Diadophis (talk) 02:23, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

• Sub-pages are created by setting up a new page as a sub-page, for example, "user:Diadophis/Geranium" would be a sub-page of your user-space. Administrators will not delete this page without very good reason.

I feel like saying that if you start with an En page you may be less successful than simply imagining someone asking you "What is a geranium?" In general, English WP pages contain far more than a normal user needs to know, and in quite complicated language. One further thought: never put an article up on the site unfinished. Once it goes live on the site it is going to be assessed. Macdonald-ross (talk) 14:49, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I've created a new version of the article at User:Diadophis/Geranium. Is this closer to what it should look like to meet this Wikipedia's standards? Diadophis (talk) 04:23, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Request for rollback right

Hi, Mac! I want you to now am I ready to get rollback right, or if I'm ready would you give it to me? Roj Serbest Kerîm Talk with me 17:39, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Golden Bowerbird...

...is a species of bird, so why do you undo my edits when I put the species and genus in. It is NOT a family of birds!!! Qwerty number1 (talk) 18:17, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

User talk:82.132.216.194

Hello,

• Between 13:40 and 13:47: the vandalism is done by 82.132.216.194
• at 13:49, the revert is done by 94Rain
• at 13:53, the warning is made by Cohaf
• Between 15:47 and 15:51, I am wrong several times on the UT of 82.132.216.194. I understand that the warning is already done.
• at 16:07, you come to make the same mistake as me.
• So now, I'm putting this page clean

Thank you for your participation. Regards. --Eihel (talk) 16:02, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Beril Böcekler

Beril Böcekler

Hi there. You deleted my article on Beril Böcekler without discussion, without even asking for more sources, claiming that she is out of scope. She is only 14-15 years old and has several national records in an 80-million population country that is Turkey. Look at this page from English Wikipedia: How many times you see her name? When someone makes that page here in simple WP, will you not feel sorry for the red link to Beril Böcekler? I am trying to control my nerves not to upset an "admin". I was away from these pages for a long time, and you gave me this welcome. Thank you. If I'm alive when we see her with a gold medal in the Olympics, you will perhaps remember me. I prefer not to. Good-bye. --E4024 (talk) 00:35, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @E4024: I think your tone is inappropriate. However, you can appeal the deletion at WP:Deletion review. I think your appeal would be successful because the article mentioned records that the subject holds. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:10, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

The article is now in here, made by another contributor (more or less with similar sourcing as I did). BTW my "inappropriate tone" was not inappropriate. When people with some buttons just delete your work without even consultation, notice, warning or whatever else, they may expect to receive reactions in an "inappropriate tone", although mine was not inappropriate at all. Now I am asking, expecting and hoping to see the merge of historial of the page, because it is a privilege for me to have begun the article of this brilliant youngster and I really want it to be seen at the page history. Thanks in advance. --E4024 (talk) 02:29, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Bring my article back. Simple WP lost a contributor for bigotry. Auntof6, if you wish to keep better relations with admins that is your choice. I speak my opinions clear and loud. I am a transparent person. Bring my article back. Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 14:03, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Auntof6, I see that in the meantime you have become an admin here (congratulations :) why don't "you" bring my article back. Read your words about Beril Böcekler above. I want to see my name in that page history. She is a total stranger to me but I am proud of this kid breaking adult women's records one by one. Bring my article back. Please, Aunt. --E4024 (talk) 14:12, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

E4024, Auntof6 has been an administrator here for over seven years. I would appreciate if you kept a civil tone in your discussions with other editors, and assume good faith. If you had followed Auntof6's advice and appealing it through our deletion review process, this would have been settled in January. Regardless, this is easy enough to manage without a deletion review, as it's an A4. Given the existence of an English Wikipedia article, the medals achieved, and that the deletion here was one based on administrator discretion (an A4 deletion), I've restored the page. Best regards, and happy editing, Vermont (talk) 15:43, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Following the blocking of User:Va te faire foutre Cons!

In addition to the blocking, this user violates the rule of good behavior following Wikipedia:Username. I write to you because I do not know what is your level in French exactly (fr-2 on your UP, fr-N for me). The translation of the user name in English is: "Fuck you Asshole" (non-literal). The name can be added to meta:Title blacklist. For deletion, I would leave the decision to the competent BUs. Sorry if you understood the name and did what was necessary. Sincerely and a good weekend. --Eihel (talk) 12:15, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I reblocked the user (my French is at near-native level); a user with this name is unlikely to be successful here, no matter what else happened...--Eptalon (talk) 13:14, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

@Eptalon: I allowed myself this. With pleasure and good evening. --Eihel (talk) 20:59, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you both. My idiomatic French is improved! Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:59, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

I add the thought that a recent BBC production of Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte has the heroine leaving Lowood Institution with the words Baiser mon cul, a phrase which probably post-dates 1800 (the approximate date of the fictional incident), and which few girls today would use in a formal setting (which this was). Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:16, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Deem Bristow

Hello. I've restored the page as it did not meet A2; the IP had blanked the article and replaced it with a QD tag. Thanks, Vermont (talk) 12:06, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Amber Tang

Hi! There was a Chinese version at zh:鄧卓殷 and I was about to interwiki it... WhisperToMe (talk) 09:21, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The Chinese version seems very spam to me but zhwp is more liberal in Notability and Advertising guidelines. I agree it should be gone as A4.--Cohaf (talk) 09:26, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Movies banned in China

Thank you! (I want to sign properly, but account got blocked). 84.54.77.196 (talk) 16:06, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Block evading sock puppetry above. IWI (chat) 16:38, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Meyn

Hi Macdonald-ross, I added the {{wait}} tag in order to have time to explain my submission on the talk page but the article was-nevertheless-already deleted. I have submitted the article before and made changes according to the suggestions of RHaworth, see here. I hope with this knowledge the deletion is worth considering an undeletion made by you. Dotsonti (talk) 15:46, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

• Dotsonti, you need to learn about wikilinks. Please note the changes I have made to your message. RHaworth (talk) 16:33, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

  Dotsonti, the issue isn't copyright violation only, it's spam, more details on your talkpage. Regards, --16:52, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

I've looked at it again, and I think the deletion was justified. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:40, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Restore The Fox and the Hound

The article "The Fox and the Hound" was QD'ed because of the article seemed overly complex. I believe that the article was copied and pasted from the en-wiki by another LTA vandal happening back in June 2017. Could you restore it or check the history of that page? Zaxxon0 (talk) 01:27, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

I examined it. It was a complex word-for-word copy, and had been previously deleted several times before. The present En wiki version is almost identical. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:08, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Thoroughbred

Hi Macdonald-ross, I think you will find that the "T" in "Thoroughbred" is actually capitalised, like a lot of animal breeds. Please refer to the Wikipedia article on here and on the English Wikipedia, as well the dozens of individual Thoroughbred racehorses, e.g. Phar Lap. Thanks, —Jonny Nixon (talk) 14:38, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

OK. Macdonald-ross (talk) 18:30, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Spambots

This is a typical spambot, like all the others. It's now been locked as such, please reconsider your deletion decline. Thanks! Praxidicae (talk) 16:40, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Qri - a mistake?

Hello. May I ask why you deleted Qri under A4? She is the leader of a girl group that is top ten of all time in sales. May I ask that you reconsider, please? Perhaps you can read the article and its sources again? Or perhaps check out the article on en wiki, which I translated from over the course of several hours. Over at en wiki they are certainly much stricter about notability than here. And over the course of many years, no one at enwiki has questioned it. At the very least, please undelete so we can have a proper deletion discussion about the article. This took me a lot of work over several hours and it was discouraging to see it deleted. I am very careful about notability. Desertborn (talk) 10:23, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

I'll start a thread soon about the scope of A4. Personally, I see it as heavily overused. Vermont (talk) 11:14, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

@Macdonald-ross: I would be happy to provide a list of news articles if you would like, specifically about Qri, to show notability. In fact, in the article that was deleted there was 11 sources from various publications. However, it is quite easy to provide more if needed. The more I think about it, the more puzzled I am about your deletion of this under A4. This subject is more notable than many other persons I have read articles on here. If you had to stick by the deletion of Qri as the standard for notability, many articles on simple would have to go as well. Was it simply a mistake? I did note this article was deleted once before under A4, many years ago. Perhaps you just saw that it had been re-created and deleted again? Of course in the years in between it is quite possible that a person becomes notable. That is what happened here. Desertborn (talk) 22:25, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Upon further thought, I don't believe A4 applies here even if you had concerns over notability. Our A4 is broadly equal to A7 on en wiki. Note the following statement from Credible claim of significance on en wiki: "One, search for a statement within the article that attributes noteworthiness to the subject; for example: 'John Doe is the State President of the Democratic Party in Tasmania'...Such a claim of noteworthiness need not be supported by any reference; the fact that such a claim exists, deems that the A7, A9 and A11 tags cannot be applied." That is pretty clear. While I can't review my article anymore, since it is deleted, I recall a clear claim to notability. Something to the affect Qri is singer and actress, who is the leader of popular girl group, a solo artist who has put out her own albums and singles, and been a lead in TV shows. Based then on this, even if you contest notability, I believe A4 does not apply. Therefore, I humbly ask that you un-delete the article. Then if you still feel it should be deleted, I ask that we have a deletion discussion per WP:DP. Of course, I feel Qri is clearly notable (and the consensus on enwiki agrees). Desertborn (talk) 23:11, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

I hope you can see that you did not make a clear claim for notability. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:35, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I think the two awards won are a claim of notability. If anyone thinks those particular awards aren't significant enough to show notability, they can take this to RfD. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:34, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Macdonald-ross, for undeleting the page. I appreciate it and would like to do my best to address your concerns. Can you explain them in more detail? Maybe I don't think well or cannot grasp the meaning well, but I just cannot see where I did not make a claim. It seems clear to me and matches what is well accepted on the same article in en wiki. So perhaps if you can explain in detail, it will help. Then I can try to address it. Also, how would you suggest I change the wording or improve the article to address your concerns? Desertborn (talk) 12:47, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Having read your comment over at simple talk, I think I have an idea now of what you expect. I made a few edits to Qri in the lead section. Does this sentence satisfy your requirements for a claim? "She is known for being the leader of T-ara, which is one of the best-selling girl groups of all time." Or does it need further edits? If you think it is still not direct enough, what would you change to make it enough? Desertborn (talk) 13:11, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that is what was needed, and in addition the claim is supported by reference #2. There is no further problem abut notability. Thank you. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:32, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Pelican eel

Just curious to find out why you deleted Pelican eel. Thanks in advance for replying Ottawahitech (talk) 16:23, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Pinging User:Auntof6, who declined the original QD request. I've restored it as administrators should not QD articles that are contested, which this was. Vermont (talk) 16:43, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

@Vermont: That depends on what you mean by "contested". The usual way to contest a QD is to use the {{wait}} template. The text displayed by that template specifically says that using that template "is not a guarantee, and the page may still be deleted if it meets the quick deletion criteria, or if an explanation is not provided very soon," so admins can and do delete pages contested via that template. But maybe you meant that a previous QD request had been declined? --Auntof6 (talk) 20:35, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

That is what I meant, yes. Apologies for any confusion. Vermont (talk) 20:48, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

In the last 7 months, you've received 14 complaints about your deletions. Please try to be more careful. Vermont (talk) 16:49, 15 May 2019 (UTC)