:It's possible, but the reason the article was tagged was lack of evidence of notability. Have you evidence (via [[WP:RS|reliable sources]]) that he is notable? You can improve a CV 'til the cows come home, but it's still a CV unless there's notability. [[User:KillerChihuahua|Killer]][[User talk:KillerChihuahua|<span style="color: #415651;">Chihuahua</span>]] 12:15, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
:It's possible, but the reason the article was tagged was lack of evidence of notability. Have you evidence (via [[WP:RS|reliable sources]]) that he is notable? You can improve a CV 'til the cows come home, but it's still a CV unless there's notability. [[User:KillerChihuahua|Killer]][[User talk:KillerChihuahua|<span style="color: #415651;">Chihuahua</span>]] 12:15, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
::Yes, I believe there is considerable evidence that he meets notability requirements for WP:ENT for both point #1 "Has significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions" and #3 "Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment." For point #1 he has played a significant role in several films listed in IMdB. He also has a featured "special" on a new platform (Drybar) and two audio CDs. I'll clean up the article to make this more clear. To point #3 his background as a professional drummer and as the founder of a University drumline group (the Green Man group) make his contribution as an entertainer unique. [[User:Tbc32|Tyler]] ([[User talk:Tbc32|talk]]) 18:37, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
::Yes, I believe there is considerable evidence that he meets notability requirements for WP:ENT for both point #1 "Has significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions" and #3 "Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment." For point #1 he has played a significant role in several films listed in IMdB. He also has a featured "special" on a new platform (Drybar) and two audio CDs. I'll clean up the article to make this more clear. To point #3 his background as a professional drummer and as the founder of a University drumline group (the Green Man group) make his contribution as an entertainer unique. [[User:Tbc32|Tyler]] ([[User talk:Tbc32|talk]]) 18:37, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
::: A university band member isn't notable. A University band that was written up in Rolling Stone, now that would be notable. My ex husband has over a dozen cd's; he's not the least bit notable, as he'd tell you himself. Did the cd's hit any charts, for playing, or sales? Was he in the credits for any of those films, and if so was he a tiny minor part or a major part? [[User:KillerChihuahua|Killer]][[User talk:KillerChihuahua|<span style="color: #415651;">Chihuahua</span>]] 12:03, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:KillerChihuahua.
Wikimedia Foundation
Talk to the Puppy To leave a message on this page, click here.
If you email me, be aware that even if I am actively editing, I cannot always access my email and it may be a day or two before you receive a reply. If you message me on this page, I will probably reply on this page. If I messaged you on your page, please reply there.
*Post new messages to the bottom of my talk page.
*Comment about the content of a specific article on the Talk: page of that article, and not here.
*Sign your post using four tildes ( ~~~~ )
That's the general idea, anyway. :-) Thank you for the kind welcome. I am delighted to see you are still here! KillerChihuahua 14:20, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's great to see one of my favourite Wikipedians back to editing! Guettarda (talk) 15:09, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Except that IIRC (and I think I do!) adminning here is more like herding cats than sheep. Rabid mutant cats. KillerChihuahua 15:40, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely right, though this lot are also scary to meet face to face. . . . dave souza, talk 16:34, 13 September 2019 (UTC) [reply]
You mean like this one?. I join the chorus of those who are glad to see you back KC!! Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 15:59, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Marnette! I should caution you against outing editors, even by linking to their photographs, though! (I think I recognize that one....) :-D KillerChihuahua 16:07, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
How nice to see something welcome and happy on Wikipedia for a change. Welcome back. Giano(talk) 16:56, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This round’s on me. G -- Thanks, Giano! I see you're springing for the good stuff. - KC
Thank you, both of you! My goodness, this is turning into quite the old-timers' reunion! (Garçon, another round for my friends, please!) KillerChihuahua 17:07, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
So glad you're back! :-) Katietalk 17:54, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Katie! Pull up a chair, we're just getting another round going, join in the festivities! KillerChihuahua 18:02, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
idk why, but your name feels very familiar. Anyways, welcome back —usernamekiran(talk) 15:09, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No idea. We've edited some of the same pages, but the closest in time was 160 days apart, so we've never had a discussion or edited an article at the same time. Stats (slow, be patient if you go look)KillerChihuahua 15:19, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I must have seen your name in some old RfC/RfAs, as your username certainly has a good impression on me. Have you tried to delete the main page? That might have impressed me. I have thought about moving it, as well as ANI. —usernamekiran(talk) 14:54, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No, never did that. Did once offer a statement against Jimbo in an ArbCom case, that might have had a similar effect. KillerChihuahua 14:56, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh heavens - so great to see you KC. Sorry to hear you had health issues, hopefully very distant in the rear view mirror. Bow to the Wow and welcome back. — Ched (talk) 16:28, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ah thanks muchly, Ched! Everything stayed calm and reasonable whilst I was away, yes? No huge arbcom cases, no overreach by the WMF, no vandalism? Good, good. Wait, what? Dang. Well, well. Who'd have thunk? KillerChihuahua 16:31, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
LOL - might have to change your name to "KillerGreyhound" - you got up to speed mighty quick there. :) — Ched (talk) 16:36, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If only I could fix my usereboxes as easily as I can read up on Current Events. :-/ KillerChihuahua 16:39, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
3 days late, happy to see you at ANI. Yngvadottir (talk) 05:25, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
ah, it's never too late to give/get a cheerful welcome message! Thank you! KillerChihuahua 12:48, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome back! --random anon admin 19:44, 16 September 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.182.252.233 (talk)
Oh, I missed this when it was posted, Thank you so much! KillerChihuahua 14:08, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, that was quite the Wikibreak! Really happy to see your aound again. Guy (help!) 00:22, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It was! I don't know that I even expected to come back. It's been a rough several years, what can I say? Cancer, several surgeries, divorce, relocation, job hunting, etc. etc. Life got complicated. I'm so pleased you're still here, and have fond enough memories of me that you're happy to see me back! KillerChihuahua 00:57, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Look what the cat dragged in! Oh, wait, probably poor choice of words... --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:09, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
ROFLMAO! Wuv you, Floquenbeam. KillerChihuahua 16:13, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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. Begoon 16:31, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
that was me trying to undo the first page move, and accidentally running into another admin doing the same thing. I've speedied the Kakooskavin article, so that's done now. I appreciate that you're trying to help, but did you even look at my page? Had you done so, you would have realized the move was accidental. Have you ever read WP:BITE? I suggest you might want to do that, to avoid treating newbies with as much callous disregard for courtesy and intentions as you have me. KillerChihuahua 16:38, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Erm, that's an automatic message which, if you hadn't been interfering in the vandalism I was trying to fix without understanding what was going on, would have gone to the now blocked vandal. WP:BITE, my ass. Once you've worked it all out and decide to apologise you know where my talk page is. smh... --Begoon 16:42, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No interest biting in your ass, thank you - thanks for showing it off to me. Clearly you are all knowing and perfect, and being rude to me because I fat fingered something is absolutely not only the correct approach, it's something you are proud of. Barnstar of bitable ass? So glad there is perfection walking among us. I'll try not to get in your way, as you alone can fix the encyclopedia, and you never err. KillerChihuahua 16:46, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Rude? Because of course you weren't? Jeez. Step back and think about it. You tore me off a strip, wrongly, pointed me at WP:BITE as though I was a noob, lectured me, all without any basis. Now you're upset that pissed me off and I said so? Perhaps you should take your return to the tools more slowly. Yes, confusion happens, but it wasn't me who started the over-reactions, nor do I regret pulling you up for it. In fact "Have you ever read WP:BITE? I suggest you might want to do that, to avoid treating newbies with as much callous disregard for courtesy and intentions as you have me." turns out to apply perfectly to you, here, ironically. Have a nice day. --Begoon 16:55, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You paste a vandalism warning on my page, yeah I am going to ask if you've read BITE. Since I didn't use my admin tools in this anywhere except to speedy the article, your telling me to stop using my tools is a bit ironic. "It wasn't me who started it" is both immature and inaccurate, not sure where you think that's going to go. And I have no idea what the phrase "pulling you up for it" even means. KillerChihuahua 17:05, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"Pulling you up for it" means telling you where to get off for accusing me of WP:BITE. I actually had no idea that Twinkle had sent that vandalism message to you instead of the vandal until you posted on my talk page. It's unfortunate, but there was nothing pro-active in that message and I certainly didn't "paste" anything anywhere. It seems to have happened because I speedied a page you had created - but I had no reason to suspect anyone but the vandal would have done that. I probably would have been as surprised as you were to receive it, but I like to think I'd have been smart enough to work out it hadn't been done deliberately.
And now I'm "immature"? Look - here's the way I see it: for obscure and unfortunate reasons, that message ended up here. You assumed there had been something active about it and gave me a condescending lecture. I didn't like that so gave you one back. Now I'm very bored with the whole thing, so if it makes you feel better I'm sorry you thought I was rude, but, honestly, you do need to look at how you jumped up and down defensively too - I'll forget all about this in half an hour - not everybody would. --Begoon 17:19, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh cool, then I can forget about it too. Moving on, you get barnstar of bitable ass + bragging about letting things be bygones, hopefully we're all done now. KillerChihuahua 17:21, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, no - lol - since it seems we both like "the last word" and are neither of us short of a "smart" retort - I think it would be funnier if I reply one last time. I'm done now, yes. --Begoon 17:30, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Just a quick reminder, Begoon when you use automated tools, you're responsible for the edits they make. "Oops, sorry, my bad" would have been more than enough. Also keep in mind that even on Twinkle, you aren't supposed to use rollback on good-faith edits, like you did here. Guettarda (talk) 17:39, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Just a quick reminder, Guettarda, that I'm well aware of my responsibility, and, had I had time to review my contributions and realise what had happened before getting my throat leaped down, "Oops, sorry, my bad" would have been exactly my response. I'll also continue to remove messages I'm replying to from my own talk page how I like, thank you, particularly "talkback notes" which I've "talked back" to. --Begoon 17:46, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Begoon you do realise that abuse of rollback is grounds of removing your Twinkle privileges, right? Guettarda (talk) 23:01, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Guettarda, Don't be silly. Even if I'd used rollback, which as you point out I didn't - check point 2: Wikipedia:Rollback#When to use rollback. I really have no idea why you're still stirring the pot, when an amicable conclusion had been reached here, but I politely suggest you stop doing it now. Thanks. --Begoon 23:11, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Can we please let this pass? GMGtalk 23:13, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure that recent actions merit an ANI report, and I'm hesitant to engage further than I already have here given the recent history. BigDWiki is continuing to make axe-grinding sorts of edits using sources that clearly don't meet WP:RS guidelines; see also here; thankfully someone else has already stepped in to that dispute. Thoughts? OhNoitsJamieTalk 22:29, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(whining) Why are we not done with him already? Argh. Puppy will take a look. KillerChihuahua 00:18, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like DrMies and ToBeFree are on it. KillerChihuahua 00:24, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
just wanted to checkin with you on the deletion of my recreation of Instana. Did you read my objection against the speedy deletion? As I pointed out the deletion vote 9 months ago was not unanimous. There were several votes to keep it.
Also the page content has been significantly extended. Thirdly the expanded contents, as well as the inherent notability should at least have a regular discussion for deletion. Lastly, locking a page which was recreated after 9 months is not really appropriate, right? FabianLange (talk) 14:12, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Take this to Request for Undelete. I am more than happy to accede to the will of my fellow editors; I scanned the article and it appeared to me to be a slightly padded repeat of the deleted article. If others disagree, I'll offer no objections at all. KillerChihuahua 14:15, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot, because Request for Undelete does not apply to G4, under which you deleted the article. it is requested that I find consensus with you here, otherwise I would need to take it to Wikipedia:Deletion_review. If you are inviting others to voice their opinion, why not turn the speedy deletion into a regular one? FabianLange (talk) 14:21, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, you're right. I'm digging through contributions of a pair of edit warriors who came to AN right now, sorry! Please be patient and as soon as I'm done there I'll take a harder look at your article. Thanks in advance for your kind forbearance! Busy puppy. KillerChihuahua 14:25, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
thank you for waiting. Ok, the articles ARE mostly identical. The new version has the following added:
added text
Instana is a remote company with employees around the world, but also has significant offices in Chicago IL, San Francisco CA, Austin TX, Solingen, Munich and Novi Sad.
Product
The Instana product offers unified end-to-end monitoring capabilities. It automatically brings together data from servers, databases, applications, tools and services, from legacy monoliths and modern containerized microservice stacks, to present a unified view of the applications and provides a holistic view in the cloud or on-premises.[7]
One of Instana's core features is fully automatic monitoring of microservice applications, such as the ones deployed in Kubernetes or Cloud Foundry and its distributed tracing works with all major programming languages and supports the OpenTracing[8], OpenCensus, OpenTelemetry and W3C Trace Context standards. It includes metric based IT infrastructure monitoring, distributed tracing based application performance monitoring, end user monitoring, container monitoring, database monitoring, serverless service monitoring, automated root cause analysis and alerting functionality. The product is offered as a SaaS solution and as an on-premises installation. It can be purchased directly from Instana, from channel partners or from online marketplaces like Amazon. It is licensed by number of hosts under monitoring.
None of this establishes the company's notability. The original article was rejected twice at AFC, then created anyway, then deleted due to not meeting notability. The rest of the article is identical to the deleted version, and the added text is advertising, basically. So yes, this is the same problem as before, the article has been created three times now (not one) and deleted every time. KillerChihuahua 15:04, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate you looking into this in more detail, but you are ignoring the fact that the contents of the article does not need to meet the notability threshold, but the company itself. Time has passed, right? The AfC was in 2017, and it was controversial at that time already, since one particular editor was just voting against the article and not helping in the creation (as is the intention of AfC), then after a year in late 2018, the page was deleted, with effectively a 3:2 vote. Now 9 months later you are deleting it under G4. But G4 does not apply to "pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies". I ask for the reason for the deletion to be re-examined. Please let me know if you still stand by your decision that this is a valid Speedy Deletion, so that I can move on with my appeal to Wikipedia:Deletion_reviewFabianLange (talk) 15:22, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not ignoring a damn thing, "older" doesn't mean "more notable" and you have not shown the company to be notable. Not in the "new version" of the article, not here. KillerChihuahua 15:24, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The point is not that "old" = "notable", but a deletion discussion that focused on notability cannot cover 2019 facts when it was run in 2018, right? if you think it does not pass notability, please restore it, mark it for deletion, and have a new discussion, on new content and new 2019 facts. This is not a page that was created 20 times a months. we are talking 3 times in three years. FabianLange (talk) 15:28, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Where is your 2019 fact that establishes notability? What event occurred that establishes the company as notable? What newsworthy event, what ground breaking strides, what action that was covered in multiple major news sources? If such an item exists, you failed to place it in the article. KillerChihuahua 15:30, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As I pointed out WP:ARTN says that the contents of the article are not to be used to determine the notability of the subject but third party sources. You are right that I failed to provide them, but that alone does not justify deletion, let alone speedy deletion. WP:NTEMP also explicitly says that articles may be recreated when new evidence supports its existence. You have not considered the possibility of new evidence. Again, I request that you either undelete or unprotect the page. I am willing to work with you or any other interested editors to make the page better. FabianLange (talk) 15:42, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And you're missing the point profoundly. Where. Is. Your. New. Evidence. Put it here. Right here. On my talk page. Because it certainly wasn't on the article page. KillerChihuahua 15:44, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am appealing the speedy deletion here. This is not the place to argue notability. You have violated the rules for speedy deletion. Thats ok, everybody can make mistakes. As you pointed out you didn't even read it, and you were thinking about an edit war. The speedy deletion was incorrect. It doesn’t matter if you consider it notable or not. But no problem. I will bring it up on Wikipedia:Deletion_review. FabianLange (talk) 16:06, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Your argument for undeletion is that the company is now notable. Show me. Or I don't undelete. It's really very simple. The article made no claims of notability above what was in the original article, which was deleted for failing notability. If you don't have something, there is no reason for me to undelete. Either show me something to support your claim, or stop this endless posting asking me to undelete. KillerChihuahua 16:09, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Instana. 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. FabianLange (talk) 17:13, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Problem redirect creation
Could you take a look at the activities of Awikivisitor20122018 (talk·contribs) with regard to creating nonsense redirects? I’ve been nominating them for CSD (thanks for the help there). S/he’s not taking the hints [1][2]. Toddst1 (talk) 16:20, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've left a 3RR warning while I look at this in more detail. KillerChihuahua 16:27, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Try to engage the editor during their block - not to the point of harassment, but a simple "can we discuss this?" kind of thing on their talk page. They may be immune to clue, but we can at least try. If the behavior begins again after the block expires, take it to AN3 again, and mention that this is a repeat visitor to that page. (with a link) Good luck. KillerChihuahua 17:19, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I saw your question.
Fram's claim that he has left me alone? Incorrect. He has needled me enough to let me know I am on his Nixonian list. The most recent, prior to [3]
was [4] Geo Swan should have been banned from BLPs years and years ago. This one was far from the worst (borderline speedy, but I certainly would have voted for deletion at AfD anyway). Things like User:Geo Swan/Fa‘iz al-Shanbari (from 2009) or User:Geo Swan/Hesham Mohamed Hussain and User:Geo Swan/Mohammed Quayyum Khan (from 2012) should not remain in userspace indefinitely, and have no chance of becoming articles anyway, so a major cleanup of Geo Swan's userspace seems necessary.
In the fall of 2010 Fram and I had had very little interaction. He left what looked like a good faith
suggestion I consider deleting some userspace pages. That is how I treated it. I spent a long time looking at. Hours? All morning, all afternoon, all day? I can't remember now. But I looked at every page he listed, and tried to figure out what triggered his concern.
For some pages I thought triggered his concern because he couldn't understand what they were for. So I spent time, considerable time, trying to explain how I was using them. That turned out to be an enormous mistake.
For some I thought his concerns were misplaced.
Finally, in some instances, I thought I saw what triggered his concern, and I made edits to fix them.
Fram wasn't joking. He soon proceeded to return to my contributions, and nominate userspace pages, and articles, at a far greater pace than anyone could reasonably be expected to respond to. This first intense focus on me lasted for months. At least half a dozen of his fellow administrators warned him that his focus on me gave the strong appearance of malice.
Fram blew them all off.
It seemed to me, at the time, that if Fram had not been an administrator, and he ignored just a couple of administrator warnings, he would have found himself issued a 24, 48, or 72 hour block. And if, after that block, he had returned to giving the appearance of a focus triggered by malice, he would have been issued longer and longer blocks, right up to indefinite.
If Fram returns to being an administrator, will he be an "unblockable" again?
Finally, can I ask you to email me a deleted file? Could you email me the former contents of User:Geo Swan/Eyad Alrababah? It is the page the other administrator deleted, and then asked for Fram's support, when I asked him to email it to me.
Fram has made it clear he doesn't want you on his talk page, yet you posted there twice three times, in quick succession. I suggest you avoid doing so, as it is you're hardly in a position to cast aspersions. If an editor states they want to avoid contact, and you post on their page, you can hardly expect them to be kindly disposed towards you. KillerChihuahua 17:23, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As Drmies is the admin who deleted the page as a BLP violation/attack page, I suggest you approach him first, and make your case for why he should send you the deleted page. KillerChihuahua 17:26, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Killer, GeoSwan is sometimes criticized for writing up BLPs with little or no sourcing. This is one of those cases, where we have a completely non-notable person (who was accused of something and then cleared) whose biography has a strong BLP1E flavor to it, but in addition it has a ton of content about a previous misdemeanor and all the accusations that were leveled at him, which resulted in his eviction on the rather vague conviction of "playing a role in identity theft". The sourcing is minimal: a few newspaper articles, a single mention in one book, and a few mentions in a rather sensationalist book which seems to blow up his role far beyond what was proven in court. So, the article as a whole is pretty much an attack page, in blowing this out of proportion. It's not even a biography since not a single event of his life outside this one single episode is described.
I'm no friend of Fram, but in this case I agree: this wasn't the first time that I found Geo Swan's BLPs to be falling short. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 21:39, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
GeoSwan: The deleting admin has declined your request, you have your answer. KillerChihuahua 23:27, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
IP personal attack
Hello KillerChihuahua, it looks the IP 100.19.65.89 removed my previous 4im NPA warning and continued with the general personal attacks. -- LuK3(Talk) 19:08, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, he did. He's venting against Teh Evil Admins here; he's not vandalizing articles. I'm a lot more lenient about usertalk space; I suspect this is a previously blocked editor but he's not editing anything but a usertalk page so far. It's NPA violations not mainspace vandalism, and it's on a user talk page, and it's vaguely directed at all admins rather than anyone in particular. I think he'll run out of steam; if another admin chooses to block then I won't fuss because I don't care, but I'm not going to block unless he keeps at it. KillerChihuahua 19:14, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Copy that, thanks for the reply. -- LuK3(Talk) 19:15, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
aaaand, he blanked his talk page, and it was tagged for speedy, and I speedy deleted it. Finis (hopefully) KillerChihuahua 19:18, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy deletion question
Hi there, just a question as I've not seen it clearly stated - are user sandboxes CSD-able under U5? I get that sandboxes are for testing, and I've come across sandboxes that look like drafts for legitimate things, and others that look like adverts. What's typically the best course of action or a place to report these? - D7a894f1d (talk) 19:12, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy as adverts if they look unsalvageable, IMO. I'm pretty lenient about sandbox space, and articles started in a sandbox are sometimes (I hesitate to say often) improved, sourced, and cleaned up either before moving to mainspace (by original editor), or soon after (by others). YMMV, though, you just have to use your best judgement. KillerChihuahua 19:16, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Bit between the teeth, sigh. Thank you for letting me know. KillerChihuahua 12:04, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Categories for deletion
Hi. Any idea how to nominate more than one category for deletion? Ruwaym is trying to nationalize every pre-modern figure, as seen here [5]. I did try to look it up at this [6] but it's so horribly written. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:52, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I may be late in answering, if so I'm sorry - I edit when I can, which is irregular. I have no idea how to do it "correctly" but I know you can do it by nominating one category, then editing and adding all other categories in a list beneath, in the same entry on CFD. Be sure they are all inarguably the same issue. KillerChihuahua 12:07, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, looks like they're gone now, good. Again, I apologise if you expected a rapid response - I'm an intermittent admin only. KillerChihuahua 12:16, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Clint Pulver
Hi KillerChihuahua. You recently deleted a page that I created Clint Pulver. Is it possible to get that page put onto the talk page or onto my sandbox? I got some good feedback on the Articles for Deletion page and would like to improve the article and resubmit. - tbc32 (talk) 014:13, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's possible, but the reason the article was tagged was lack of evidence of notability. Have you evidence (via reliable sources) that he is notable? You can improve a CV 'til the cows come home, but it's still a CV unless there's notability. KillerChihuahua 12:15, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I believe there is considerable evidence that he meets notability requirements for WP:ENT for both point #1 "Has significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions" and #3 "Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment." For point #1 he has played a significant role in several films listed in IMdB. He also has a featured "special" on a new platform (Drybar) and two audio CDs. I'll clean up the article to make this more clear. To point #3 his background as a professional drummer and as the founder of a University drumline group (the Green Man group) make his contribution as an entertainer unique. Tyler (talk) 18:37, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A university band member isn't notable. A University band that was written up in Rolling Stone, now that would be notable. My ex husband has over a dozen cd's; he's not the least bit notable, as he'd tell you himself. Did the cd's hit any charts, for playing, or sales? Was he in the credits for any of those films, and if so was he a tiny minor part or a major part? KillerChihuahua 12:03, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
HaroldDunlop unblock request
Hi KC, I noticed you put the unblock request at User_talk:HaroldDunlop on hold a little under two weeks ago. It looks like discussion died off around the 19th. Are you still considering unblocking? SQLQuery me! 02:25, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The blocking admin responded, and Harold's had plenty of time to answer my question and has failed completely to do so satisfactorily. I've changed OnHold to Declined. He can re-request if he wants. KillerChihuahua 12:12, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that was basically my plan - but I didn't want to step on your toes if you were still considering an unblock. SQLQuery me! 17:47, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No worries - FYI, I know I'm only here intermittently, so in the future, if you feel something needs handling/doing and I'm not around, feel free to just do it. I'd appreciate a courtesy note here on my talk page, but if it's obvious what you've done and why, that isn't necessary if you haven't the time or inclination. KillerChihuahua 19:17, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In the future, if you come across an empty category, please just tag with a CSD C1 tag, do not delete it. Then, empty categories sit for 7 days in Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion. If, after a week, the category is still empty, then it is deleted. If it is no longer empty after 7 days, then the tag is removed.
This is the process now because it gives category creators time, after creating a category, to find appropriate pages for it. Also, sometimes categories are emptied out-of-process and this week gives other editors time to discover what the issue is and recategorize articles. Thanks! LizRead!Talk! 16:48, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, my error. Would you like me to undelete? Easily done. KillerChihuahua 17:13, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories.
Technical news
As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.
