Misplaced Pages

'Recent Change Patrol' Mistakes
When patrolling 'recent changes,' mistakes can occur. If I revert a legitimate edit, mistaking it for vandalism please leave me a kind and courteous message alerting me of my misunderstanding and I will take full responsibility for my actions. Sincere apologies will be offered to all involved so please don't be angry with me, I'm just trying to improve Misplaced Pages.

Template:Archive box collapsible

Speedy deletion contested: The Woman University

Hello Avono. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of The Woman University, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: G4 is only for articles previously deleted at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion. Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:59, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

then what is the suitable tag for articles which were deleted under csd? Avono♂ (talk) 10:20, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

There isn't one. It's only things deleted at AfD (and presumably the other -fD things) that can be tagged G4. CSD and prod repeats have to be judged on their merits as they stand, as if they were quite new. It's because AfD is a discussion and the other two aren't. Repeated creation is taken into consideration by admins, who may 'protect' a page from being re-created if it appears too frequently. Peridon (talk) 14:10, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Peridon is correct. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:15, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Trichocladus dentatus

I've declined your speedy on two main grounds. First, A7 allows the deletion of articles about non-notable individual (i.e. named) animals, like Gertie the Hippo, or Dylan (the dog belonging to Umberto Bloggs). This is a species, not an individual. Second, it's a flower not an animal. Please check these things a bit more carefully. Peridon (talk) 14:02, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

so under what criteria (csd,prod or afd) would it fall than? if its the name of a non existent species how can it be then Notable ? s Avono♂ (talk) 18:24, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Don't think that everything is covered by CSD. It's a limited scope short cut to stop prod and AfD getting even more overloaded. Something that really is a non-existent species would come under hoax. I found three beautiful ones when I was patrolling Edits by Recent Accounts some years ago. Very convincing - but to me as a naturalist, something didn't ring true. Most hoaxes are obvious (and utter Grade 3 crap...), but those were good. Something that says that it might be a species and might just be a synomym is unlikely to be a hoax. There are many things like that in taxonomy. Some species are hard to define and things get mistaken - as witness that newly identified (but long ago pointed out) frog on Staten Island. (I was surprised to hear that there WERE frogs on Staten...) Do a quick Google on things - it's better to be beaten to the nomination than to be first and get it wrong. The flower had a link to the genus article - that would tell you that it was a flower, and Google that it was an unresolved name. What happens is, botanists examine specimens and put them in genus and species etc. Sometimes they don't know that someone else has already checked that thing and called it something different. Somtimes someone describes something, and later on, no-one is certain what the heck it was that they were describing - perhaps because the description seems to cover two different things. Oh yes, things aren't always fixed. There are people called lumpers, and others called splitters. They argue like a bad day on WP:AN/I. (Unlike dog breeders, they don't often shoot each other, though.) Lumpers go for broad definitions (fewer species), splitters for narrow ones (more species). End of biology lesson Peridon (talk) 19:03, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Now for A7. Mainly for things with legs and names. People, groups of people, and individually named animals (but not species or other classifications). Events have been added, and they usually involve people - but must be organised. A spontaneous riot is not A7. Educational establishments are not A7. For some reason web content is OK for A7. If an article is about crimsonseagull.com, it can be A7ed. But an article about the Crimson Seagull browser can't be, because you download it and use it at home (if you're daft enough to pay them $49.93 for a ripoff of Netscape 2). Spinoffs of things like Minecraft and D and D (like one I've just made up, DungeonCraftMine) are liable to A7 because you play online. Apps for your phone are not A7 because you download them. Complicated? Very. Those of us that actually delete things fight long battles with those who want to keep (almost) everything. Keep the CSD page open in a window or tab and check with it. After a while, you'll find you're using it less, and are getting fewer messages... Peridon (talk) 19:17, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

To answer Avono's unanswered question about how to deal with an article about a species that may or may not exist, which is what xe tried to tag for speed: the proper move is that anything that can't be speedied can always be PRODed. In this case your PROD rationale could be something as simple as "a species name that has not yet been resolved, and therefore may or may not actually exist". If no one disagrees with your rationale, the problem article is gone in 7 days, and all's good. If someone removes the PROD, then you can take the issue to AFD next. WikiDan61_ReadMe!! 20:28, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Los Estómagos

Hello Avono, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Los Estómagos, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. §FreeRangeFrog 16:23, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Please also remember to always notify the creator when you tag an article for deletion. §FreeRangeFrog 18:14, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

If you use WP:TWINKLE it does it for you. When I got made an admin, people were amazed that I hadn't used it and had made 12,000 edits all manually. (No-one had told me about it...) You still need to choose your criteria carefully, but it makes prod and AfD far easier to use, and does the notifying. HOWEVER, if an article was created by FredBloggs in late 2008 (not seen since early 2009), and it's been edited for three years by SillySod45838, it's a good idea to notify that one too. Just a brief note with a link to the article will do. It might even be the same person using an alternative account. Peridon (talk) 19:28, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

English etymology issue

There is speedy deletion for my English etymology article.Coren Search Bot wrote it is copied from Salt World forum but I posted it on Salt World forum as Xand you can check it.Please don't delete it or other etymologies it is from Etymonline dictionary.Thanks. Xand2 金日光旦照 (talk) 15:44, 5 November 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xand2 (talk • contribs)

first you will have to find a way to confirm it, there is no way to know if you are telling the truth. Secondly the article rather belongs to Wikitionary than wikiedpia Avono♂ (talk) 09:43, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

As Avono♂ says, definitions belong more on Wiktionary than here. But, if it is published somewhere already it is copyright and can't be used here in that wording. And if it is copied from Etymonline, you shouldn't have posted it anywhere. Etymonline is marked as copyright. If you wrote it and published it (by putting it on paper or online), it's still copyright. Unless a site is marked clearly that it's licensed under Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 3.0 AND the GFDL, you can't copy stuff from it to here. (Same applies at Wiktionary.) If it's very old, like before 1920, it's likely to be public domain by now - the normal rule is 75 years after the author (or the last co-author) has died. Peridon (talk) 10:36, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

OK but Misplaced Pages has article Latin derivatives so I thought that it is OK to post it. https://en.wikipedia.org/List_of_Latin_words_with_English_derivatives Xand2 金日光旦照 (talk) 15:44, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Ah, but - the Latin list is quite limited in scope. To cover the complete English etymology, you'd need a whole wiki - or Wiktionary, which is already there. You had stuff from a variety of languages with no connection except that they've come into English, It would be unworkable as a page. And as has been pointed out, it's available at Wiktionary. The Latin list also differs from Wiktionary in that it works forwards from the Latin word to the English words, unlike Wiktionary and other dictionaries which take the English word and work back. Please do use ~~~~ to sign talk page posts - it saves time accessing your talk page and contribs list. Peridon (talk) 12:13, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

OK I did use ~~~~ to sign all of my edits on talk pages but I have clicked near bottom of edit page to automatically add signature.Many tell me that I didn't signed my edits but I did.Thanks. Xand2 金日光旦照 (talk) 15:44, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing my new moth article

Thank you for reviewing the article I just created.

  Bfpage |leave a message  13:45, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

if you meant this article Acmosara polyxena, just remember to cite a source to fully complete the stub ;) Avono♂ (talk) 13:49, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

November 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Justin Lavender (opera singer) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• rcm.ac.uk/vocal/professors/profile/?id=5186 Justin Lavender’s Profile at the Royal College of Music] | title=Justin Lavender | accessdate=5 November 2014}}</ref>.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:59, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Washington State House elections, 2016

Hi Avono, I'm a bit confused by your reasoning for proposing deletion: "non existent election page". Many election pages exist for election that have not yet occurred, such as United_States_presidential_election,_2016; being a future event does not make it "non existent", it just makes it a future event. If you care to explain your reasoning further, I'd be happy to discuss it further. Peace, --Wikibojopayne (talk) 19:11, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

ok since that article exist, this one can as well, however I prodded it because what stops people from creating Washington State House elections, 3000, also how can a event be notable when it hasn't happened yet? Avono♂ (talk) 19:15, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Your reasoning makes total sense to me, I just want to keep the election articles consistent. Also, making articles about elections before the event makes it easier for future editors to fill in the info when the election comes around. But on future events being notable, I suppose some Wikipedians have a particular understanding of the time-space continuum wherein all events have happened, or at least that Misplaced Pages notability exists outside of linear understandings of time and existence. That's all I got. Peace, --Wikibojopayne (talk) 19:21, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) A future event can be notable if people have already started writing about it. No one has yet declared their candidacy for the Washington State House elections, 3000, and no journalist has yet started to contemplate such a race. Many journalists have stated to contemplate the 2016 races, and many candidates have either announced or have been rumored to be considering running. Now is the time that Misplaced Pages articles on the 2016 elections will start to form. WikiDan61_ReadMe!! 19:29, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tagging

Today I have removed your speedy deletion tags on Enviro 400 mmc and Enviro 200 mmc, and changed the criterion on Игра за тронове; the former two because they are not things "made up one day" but rather are models of buses manufactured by a major bus manufacturer in Europe, and the latter because the context of the article was clear enough if one took the trouble to throw it into Google translate and discover that it was an attempt to write about Game of Thrones in Russian (qualifying under WP:CSD#A10, but not WP:CSD#A1). Enthusiastic new page patrol is fine, but an overly quick trigger finger on the delete button doesn't really help anyone, and you should do some basic homework before nominating articles for deletion. WikiDan61_ReadMe!! 19:26, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

shouldn't they be merged with Alexander_Dennis_Enviro400 then ? At its current state they shouldn't be their own separate articles Avono♂ (talk) 19:33, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Merging is a different issue. Perhaps they should be, as the current articles are really too short. But speedy deletion is not the proper road. WikiDan61_ReadMe!! 19:35, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Ok, understood, Then I will have them redirected Avono♂ (talk) 19:37, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

No, that's not right either. These articles are about new models. Simply redirecting without merging the content loses the information. WikiDan61_ReadMe!! 20:57, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

have a look at http://www.busandcoachbuyer.com/operators-bus/, apparently the model was only updated with new options Avono♂ (talk) 21:00, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

and the 400mmc model was already mentioned in the Enviro400 article Avono♂ (talk) 21:20, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Based on the busandcoachbuyer.com article, the redirect is appropriate (apparently the MMC designation is an internal project name, and does not actually apply to the bus model name), but the MMC nomenclature should be explained at the redirect target. The 400mmc model is not mentioned by name at the redirect target (although it is now clear why). WikiDan61_ReadMe!! 21:38, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm WikiOriginal-9. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Eliseo Roberto Colón Zayas, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 21:00, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Benjamin B. Tucker

Avano hi,

This is a new article and we are in the process of adding all the necessary, we have added the appropriate reference. Would you please remove your delete request as this article is being developed as more information about Mr tucker becomes available buy the hour. Currently we are in the process of adding a handful of more references.

Jimgerbig (talk) 21:37, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

done, will tag it as under contruction Avono♂ (talk) 21:38, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Piet Byleveld

I removed your speedy tag, because there is an allegation of notability and three citations. Bearian (talk) 23:36, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Bad speedy deletion practices

Hello Avono. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that you shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1), or content (CSD A3), moments after they are created. It's best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Misplaced Pages. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks.Template:Z149 The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 19:28, 6 November 2014 (UTC)