User talk:Finngall

Hello Finngall! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! —EncMstr 19:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC) Getting started Wikipedia tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Building consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

New message from TheLongTone

Hello, Finngall. You have new messages at TheLongTone's talk page.
Message added 14:15, 4 January 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TheLongTone (talk) 14:15, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Although it occurs to me that as the subject of a previous AfD it is probably a candidate for a speedy delete.TheLongTone (talk) 14:16, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

the message on my talk page is obsoleteTheLongTone (talk) 14:30, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Questions and response to Arthur C. Martinez article Jan 7

Hi Finngall, I'm being paid by Arthur C. Martinez to update the Wikipedia page covering him as much information is left-out or inaccurate. I plan on drafting a sandbox article for him with sources, per your recommendation. When I complete this, will I be able to send it to you for verification? Also, do you know how I can recover all of the article work I completed that was deleted? I spent the past few hours on it and would like to recover it. New to Wikipedia so unsure of these intricacies. Thank you for your help! MatthewSForner (talk) 22:42, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Finngall. You have new messages at SS Bendure Hartwig's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SS Bendure Hartwig (talk) 18:04, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

redirects

Yes I think I got confused. There is no article about John Welles, Member of the Parliament of England for Newcastle-under-Lyme, who is clearly a different person. Rathfelder (talk) 23:19, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

List of Decepticons

I've added a note on this article explaining clearly why it should be deleted but hasn't. The problem with {{db-xfd}} is you don't get to clarify the reason for it, so I look at it and thought "somebody's trying to CSD something during an AfD - that can't be right!" Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:22, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: Yeah, I troll WP:BADAFD regularly so I've actually done quite a few db-xfd's that show up there under "Articles with links to closed AfD's"--articles under that heading are frequently malformed renominations but often they're either articles that XFDcloser failed to actually delete, or "also nominated" articles in a multi-article AfD that didn't get deleted along with the "main" article. In this case, I didn't feel comfortable trying to flag down a steward myself so I tagged it so that an admin would notice and do the job. Thanks. --Finngall ^talk 17:45, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Charlie Craggs

Hello, you took down my AfD on this article, the user Capewearer keeps deleting my deletion suggestions via PROD. I don't feel the article is notable, please you could you help me push it into the correct channels for evaluation. GavinMansfield (talk) 21:17, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

@GavinMansfield: As I alluded to in the edit summary of my removal of the tag, nominating an article via Articles for Deletion is a multi-step process for which tagging the article itself is merely the first. Please fully follow the instructions at WP:AFDHOWTO if you wish to proceed. After this, I'm willing to follow up if any cleanup is necessary, but you'll need to provide a clear and reasonable justification for deletion as part of the creation of the discussion page. Thanks. --Finngall ^talk 21:29, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I have tried to read through everything but it is very jargon filled and not at all aimed at a casual editor like me, although I understand why. GavinMansfield (talk) 22:39, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello sir, so the warning was deleted, how do I post an AfD warning on there GavinMansfield (talk) 10:09, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

@GavinMansfield: That’s step one. Step two is to create the discussion page and step three is to add it to the daily AfD log so that others can see it. --Finngall ^talk 15:05, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your help! GavinMansfield (talk) 15:39, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Rudeness and commenting on contributors in edit summaries

Please don't be rude in edit summaries they are permanent. Wikipedia rules are clear and users would not comment on contributors but should instead comment on contributions. If you wish to make comments which are of a rude nature that focus on a contributor and not the contributions please do so on the appropriate talk page. Rude comments towards other users is not collegiate and goes against the good faith working of Wikipedia. I do though thank you for being bold and making the improvements you saw necessary yourself. You could very easily have looked at is as you being helpful as opposed to calling it a chore and chewing up another user. Wikipedia is voluntary and things happen outside of Wikipedia which may not necessarily mean that all of the things one is "supposed" to do get done. Sparkle1 (talk) 15:27, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@Sparkle1: Another user had asked you to do the cleanup. You did not do so, and had made other edits in the meantime, so I assumed you were not interested and proceeded on my own. I am a volunteer, and generally the tasks I take on involve various forms of cleanup. Most often I'm cleaning up after vandals, which is inevitable and can't be helped. Sometimes what needs to be cleaned up is due to bugs in the system--again, can't be helped. Sometimes the problem is a well-meaning user who doesn't know what to do. If said problem only affects a single article, eh, it happens. Seventeen articles and leaving the cleanup to others even after a reminder (on what are undoubtedly low-traffic articles), well, I consider that to be rude. --Finngall ^talk 15:48, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

I have no issue with you making the statements that you have made, the issue I have is where you have made them. An edit summary is not the place to make them as Edit Summaries are permanent. If you wish to pass commentary on an individual do so on their talk page. Anywhere else is disruptive and not in the best interests of the encyclopaedia. Not how I am talking to you on your talk age and not disrupting anyone else on this encyclopaedia. All I am saying is if you want to talk about an individual do so, on their own talk page. Sparkle1 (talk) 17:07, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Omo Ranch

I removed your CSD tag from the Omo Ranch, California article, for two reasons:

1. Even though you placed the AfD tag on the page, it was never listed in the actual AfD, so none of the voters would have had a chance to look at it.
2. Unlike the pages in that AfD, which seem to have been mostly or entirely places that were never anything more than a single ranch, Omo Ranch was once a genuine community with a population of 200 or so. It's covered in a number of reliable sources; although this page isn't an RS itself, there's a bibliography at the bottom: [1].

I found this while sorting through the GNIS sub-stubs for El Dorado County. I'm doing a bit of research on each one to see which locations are notable and have sufficient discussion in reliable sources to make them into proper articles. Once I finish sorting through all ~200 of them I'm going to PROD the ones that don't meet those criteria. If any of those PRODs get removed I'll make a batch AfD. Feel free to take a look at User:CJK09/California locations cleanup/El Dorado County and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California#Cleaning up all those GNIS location articles if you want more info on what I'm doing or want to contribute. CJK09 (talk) 23:12, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@CJK09: No problem. I've seen other cases where the article wasn't actually on the AfD discussion page and the admin handling the G6 tag said "close enough to the others, delete anyway per the same criteria". Regardless of the particulars of the outcome, I just wanted it off of WP:BADAFD one way or the other. Thanks. --Finngall ^talk 23:37, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Bimal N. Patel

Greetings!

I am writing this message to seek clarity on the contents of Bimal N Patel. I had deleted a couple of paragraphs which were tarnishing his image and placed allegations on him. Please let me know how I can solve this.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by KPSportz (talk • contribs) 08:10, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

@KPSportz: I don't believe there is anything to "solve". While Wikipedia's policies on biographies of living persons mandates that editors step carefully in editing such articles, and editors should both refrain from adding unfounded allegations and be quick to remove unfounded allegations added by others. However, this is not applicable in the case of this article. The information in the paragraphs which you tried to delete was well-cited, drawn from multiple sources which are considered to be reliable, and presented in a neutral fashion, as all information in an encyclopedia should be. Indeed, I dare say it was better-sourced than many articles of its type. "Tarnishing his image" is a subjective evaluation, and is not a valid basis for removing well-sourced information provided that it is not given undue weight within the article, and it certainly isn't in this case.

You are not the first to try to remove these paragraphs, and I am not the first to reinstate them. Each time it was claimed that the information was "false" or "defaming", but these claims have never been backed up by any proof that the information is false or that the sources upon which the information is based are biased or otherwise unreliable. None have presented any reasons based on Wikipedia's policies for the removal, and each time an experienced editor has evaluated the removal based on these policies and reverted it back to its original state.

(And in case you are wondering, I have no personal stake in this at all--I have no involvement (or even any particular interest) whatsoever with the subject, and the article only came to my attention after an anonymous editor made a misguided and poorly-executed attempt to have the article deleted in its entirety.)

I hope this helps. Feel free to come back if you have further questions. Thanks. --Finngall ^talk 16:35, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for this clarification. I had been tasked with creating a new page for the subject. However, I understand that this will not be possible. I apologise for the inconvenience. Really appreciate your response. Thank you. KPSportz (talk) 22:50, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Renaissance Workshop Company

At the end, everything about the Renaissance Workshop Company has been removed in favour of the Early Music Shop in Saltaire. As usual.

Fortunately, the truth will keep being the truth independently what is stated in the wikipedia.

Kind regards 81.34.79.85 (talk) 21:04, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Please nominate GIMP version history for deletion

Hi Finngall.

Please nominate GIMP version history for deletion. Please credit it to me if you feel it is incorrect.

Sadly, I have no idea what you are talking about in your comments. I can't figure out these god damn processes. Wikipedia should be ashamed of itself for such shitty documentation and processes.

Jeffrey Walton (talk) 01:05, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

@Noloader: The article GIMP version history had been a full article and was nominated for deletion in September 2019. The result of this discussion, as chronicled at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GIMP version history, was that the content of the article should be merged into the main GIMP article, which it was. GIMP version history is now a redirect to the main GIMP article, specifically pointing to the "Versions" section of that article, which seems to me to make absolutely perfect sense.

Your tagging of GIMP version history with an Articles for Deletion tag was improper on more than one level. Firstly, since that title is a redirect and not a proper article, it is not subject to the AfD process at all. Redirects undergo a related but slightly different process at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. Secondly, AfD (and RfD) nominations are a multi-step process and tagging the article is but the first step. See WP:AFDHOWTO (or WP:RFD#HOWTO) for the full process. Thirdly, the tag you applied pointed to the old discussion from last year. If it were proper to renominate this for AfD, then you would have needed to create a new discussion page for a new discussion (as per the instructions referenced above).

Finally, I see absolutely no reason for the redirect to be deleted. Someone searching for GIMP version history would click to the title, which redirects to the relevant section on the main article. This is precisely the sort of thing redirects are for, and it seems nonsensical to me for the redirect to be removed unless the version history to which it references were to be removed in its entirety from the main article. If you disagree, you are free to nominate it and state your case so that it can be discussed among other experienced editors.

If I am misinterpreting your intent or if you have other questions, please let me know. Thank you. --Finngall ^talk 02:52, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

There is no second AfD delete. The one that was proposed (and deleted by you) was the first. Here is the Talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:GIMP_version_history.

A single page detailing GIMP releases is useless. It was not notable by any measure. The page never should have been created in the first place.

The empty page labeled as GNU software is polluting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:GNU_Project_software.

Jeffrey Walton (talk) 03:27, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

If your concern is about the category being "polluted", then the category is easily removed from the redirect page, and I have done so here.

As for your insistence that there "is no second AfD delete", I do not know what you are talking about. There was a previous AfD discussion, to which I have linked above, the result of which was the the content was merged elsewhere as per a clear consensus. Whether the "page never should have been created in the first place" is neither here nor there. You appear to be arguing for the removal of material from a place where it was already removed months ago, on a talk page which is not the proper forum to discuss its deletion. Please clarify. --Finngall ^talk 04:41, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

You might wanna look at Chris Troutman’s talk page...

...and see if that is something you wanted to do, or is some kind of Twinkle brain cramp. Qwirkle (talk) 15:11, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

@Qwirkle: Nah, the brain cramp was mine—Twinkle was merely the tool to make the mistake quickly and efficiently.  :-) --Finngall ^talk 16:24, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

I can identify with that. Qwirkle (talk) 16:48, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Prabhakar Singh

Hi, since my article has been deleted titled on 'Prabhakar Singh', I would like to retrieve the links of the same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stefanvihar (talk • contribs) 15:22, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

@Stefanvihar: As I am not an administrator, I do not have the power to fulfill your request. You will have to contact the deleting admin, Creffett. However, given that your article submissions have been repeatedly rejected and speedily deleted as contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and that you do not appear to have learned the lessons of why it has been rejected, if I were an admin I would deny the request. --Finngall ^talk 15:57, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Finngall, Stefanvihar indeed, blatantly promotional, and I am not going to return the article just so that you can submit the same promotion again. creffett (talk) 16:03, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

I would like to apologize to the editors. It is tough to pick out as to what counts as self promotional and what counts as a neutered down article. this was my first attempt at writing. the UI of Wikipedia is definitely not that friendly the first time and I waited ever so patiently and humble for all the responses without showing disrespect to any of the editors or users.

I would ask you to consider the apology as I have worked upon a neutered down version of the same article in neutral tone without any promotion of any kind for the man. . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stefanvihar (talk • contribs) 19:44, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, just to clarify, there was never any rejection that was offered for the same. All I offered was an article in a basic format, to which I offered further updates. To be fair, it was my first Wikipedia article and the it can be quite daunting to understand the challenging interface. Hence, I would request you to kindly return the article and reconsider the submission in a better format.

Stefanvihar (talk) 17:06, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

we had made our first submission on 26th February 2020 under the title 'Prabhakar Singh". However, certain changes had to be made, however due to wikipedia's complex UI we made a mistake of resubmitting the article again. While,the back and forth was happening we did not realize that we had submitted a duplicate article under the same title.

However, after realizing that we made an error, we tried to correct by waiting for wikipedia to give us technical inputs. However,numerous times we only got the message about duplication and never about the contents or the tone of the article.

After realizing the error in our ways, we intend to submit another article with the same title by respecting Wikipedia editorial guidelines.

But in all of this fiasco, never were we told about the blatant promotion but only about duplication.

Moving on, can we resubmit the article in a tone that respects wikipedia guidelines and I would sincerely urge you to consider this request and accept the submission which will be made in a better format.

Stefanvihar (talk) 18:10, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello finngall,

since, I haven't heard a reply from you then I am concluding that the matter is closed and I can input an edited version respecting wikipedia's editorial policies.

Stefanvihar (talk) 17:02, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

@Stefanvihar: Who is "we"? --Finngall ^talk 18:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Removal of AfD tag on ACE Cider

Hi there. There was an AfD for Ace Cider back in March that ended in no consensus and it looks like when you removed the AfD template from the main page you never added a mention of it to the talk page. If you could add it now I'd appreciate it. Since it's worth a mention and I don't know how to do it myself. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 11:32, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

@Adamant1: Done. If you go back to a version with the AfD tag and hit "Edit" on it, you'll see in the commented-out portion the code for the tag to be applied post-discussion that you can copy and paste to the talk page. Note that it was the closing admin who should have removed the tag, but the script that they use to automate the closing tasks is a bit unreliable. I only stepped in because it showed up on a bot-created page which tracks possibly anomalous AfD-related pages. Any way, let me know if you have further questions. --Finngall ^talk 14:51, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Perslias

Hi ,he is real iranian singer you can do it on google search, then you will find the artist musician account. i can help you: https://g.co/kgs/so7Gmt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gamebazeiran (talk • contribs) 10:30, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

@Gamebazeiran: Nobody is questioning whether he exists, and to my knowledge nobody is questioning any of the facts presented in the article as written. However, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and as such the information therein should be verifiable from multiple reliable sources which are independent of the subject. This standard is the foundation for whether a subject is considered notable enough to merit an article in this encyclopedia. Nobody deserves an article here merely for existing--there are established standards for musicians and bands and for biographies in general, and so far there has been no evidence provided that Persilias/Elias comes even close to meeting these standards, and any argument that does not address this is missing the point.

Also, I'll note that you, Perslias Singer and Eliasguitarist appear to have nearly identical editing styles, so much so that one could easily conclude that you are the same person. If so, please note that while there are legitimate reasons to have multiple accounts, tag-teaming on a single article or subject (especially to the exclusion of everything else) is not one of them. If these are all you, please restrict your editing to one account in the future. Let me know if you have questions. Thank you. --Finngall ^talk 18:03, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

--Finngall - I am an independent manager of Iranian concerts in Europe and I have to support Iranian singers due to my work. He is an Iranian singer and in Iran, due to the filtering of web pages, fans can not write their comments, they can only watch. Perslias has a lot of fans on Instagram https://www.instagram.com/perslias/ . Because Instagram is not a filter in Iran.

@Gamebazeiran: As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for promotion and was never intended to be. We are not interested in what a subject or his representatives have to say about themselves, only in what independent third parties have verifiably written about them. The artist's own websites and social media doesn't count. Press releases and other public relations fluff doesn't count. Without other sources, there is literally nothing upon which a proper encyclopedia article can be based. As the artist's representative, you are strongly discouraged from creating or editing articles on your clients due to your conflict of interest.

You are more than welcome to edit articles on other subjects in which you do not have a direct interest, but if your sole purpose is to promote your clients, there are other sites which are far better suited for the task. --Finngall ^talk 15:44, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

--Finngall - you are fascism, democrat, f..uk Wiki And You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eliasguitarist (talk • contribs) 20:55, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Your reversion of Siadatan AFD

Hi Finngall

What did I do wrong on the AFD you reverted? You said I linked to original discussion but the tag said '3rd nomination' as follows:

Yasmina Siadatan (3rd nomination)|year=2020|month=August|day=11

Thanks. Tomintoul (talk) 13:11, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

@Tomintoul: You are correct--you linked to a new discussion page, and for that I apologize. But the edit summary for the edit in which you added the tag did link to the old discussion, which is where I got tripped up. Also, you didn't actually create the new discussion page. I have no argument with the nomination per se, but the process is a multi-step process in which tagging the article is merely the first step. Let me know if you require help with the rest. Thanks. --Finngall ^talk 18:22, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

@Tomintoul: I saw that you proceeded to create the discussion page. I took the liberty of fixing the following:

• The instructions say to create the page using the {{afd2}} template. Including this template is important, because it adds a number of important links which are useful to other editors who wish to evaluate the article and provide their input (including a link back to the article itself). It also make the page visible to certain bots which run various maintenance tasks on these pages.
• The article was not transcluded to a daily log page (in this case Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2020 August 14) wherein all of the day's nominations are collected for easy viewing by the editors who regularly evaluate these things. (Also note that one of the bot maintenance tasks I mentioned above is to do this step automatically if it had been forgotten).

As it stood, if someone hadn't been around watching this article closely, it's possible that the nomination may have languished without attracting any attention at all for days or weeks. Another of the pages I monitor is a bot-generated page which tracks those articles which have been tagged the longest without resolution--I probably would have found the page there eventually if I hadn't fixed it here and now.

In any case, I've cleaned it all up so that the discussion can proceed normally. Thank you for your contributions, and happy editing. --Finngall ^talk 16:25, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

 Thank you for your help Finngall Tomintoul (talk) 17:07, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Centerstone

Hello!

I noticed you had made edits on a page I am trying to get created through AfC, draft:Centerstone. It has been rejected but I am really eager to see if I can correct the problems and have it approved--is that even possible? It had started as a really nice looking page with the organization logo and links to numerous external sources (published by news sources and other entities outside of the org). Now I am afraid the purpose has gotten lost with all of the edits I and others have made in trying to appease reviewers. I just need some guidance on what to do! Any insight is much appreciated. Rlambert327 (talk) 18:02, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

@Rlambert327: The draft has been rejected, not merely declined, meaning that the experienced editors who have reviewed it have determined that there is little to no chance that the article will be able to be improved to where it can be approved. I have not done this evaluation myself--my only involvement was to remove a tag you had placed because it was not an appropriate one to place on a draft--but I trust the judgement of DGG and Theroadislong on this matter. --Finngall ^talk 18:54, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello

		Your Opinion is More Important than You Think Barnstar
		Think you deserve this for your comment in WP:Articles_for_deletion/Fredrik_Svensk. Comments like that, besides contributing to the AfD discussion, can rescue potentially valuable editors. Walwal20 talk ▾ contribs 19:49, 3 September 2020 (UTC)