User talk:Winged Blades of Godric/Archive 9

Draft:Image style transfer

You moved this AfC submission I had accepted back to draft space with edit comment, "Undersourced, incubate in draftspace (via script)". Please take another look at the article. Unsourced can't be the actual reason for this action. What is the actual concern here? ~Kvng (talk) 14:40, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Kvng:I hope this satisfies you some-what. Nothing suggests that this has yet gone out of the research-phase and thus has claims to be notable.At all costs, this is purely a developmental concept in CV&PR.And overall citations on the topic hardly looks satisfactory. Thanks!Winged Blades^Godric 16:22, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the gesture. I don't think this should be decided by you and I alone. The article was in mainspace after I approved the AfC draft. I approved it because I think it is WP:LIKELY to survive AfD. The current state of the project has little to do with notability. What we want to look at here is WP:GNG and Giymo11 has supplied a number of reliable references. I request that you restore this to mainspace and then nominate it for deletion if you feel you must. I think going through the AfD process will help calibrate both of us as to what's worth keeping in this subject area. ~Kvng (talk) 21:25, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page

Your talk page is nearly 100,000 bytes, I think you should consider archiving the resolved threads. Capitals00 (talk) 16:26, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another question about relisting AFD discussions

Hello Winged Blades of Godric. We already discussed some stuff, but I'm still slightly confused. Would it be appropriate to relist an AFD discussion with only 1 keep vote, or should I only relist a discussion when there is zero participation? Thanks for all the help so far! SophisticatedSwampert ^{let's talk about that} 17:16, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, can someone please tell me why my signature is in a box? SophisticatedSwampert ^{let's talk about that} 17:17, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SophisticatedSwampert:--I am answering the second question first--Because the WMF wants to accord you some special treatment!Eh! Hands-in-glove??:)

The real answer

On a stricter note, it was because you had a blank space before your signature on a new line!Check the diff. below(compare the coding and the output):--

Winged Blades^Godric 17:28, 1 July 2017 (UTC)(No space!)[reply]

Winged Blades^Godric  17:28, 1 July 2017 (UTC)(Notice the extra space in the coding!)[reply]

As to the 1st question, generally Yes!But if the comment is from the article-creator or WP:SPAs, I typically leave them!Winged Blades^Godric 17:28, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Winged Blades of Godric:, thank you for the clarification! SophisticatedSwampert ^{let's talk about that} 17:32, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can you patrol/review these articles I made - thanks!

Hi, I saw that you were the one of the most frequent patrollers this year. I hope this is not too much bother to ask you. Would it be possible for you to patrol these articles that I've recently created and which still haven't been patrolled (a week later)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Zak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neta_Alchimister

Thanks! Avaya1 (talk) 19:51, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Avaya1, I have checked the sources. If the duplicate (and mostly unreliable) ones are removed - especially Bild which is the most unreliable daily redtop in the whole of Europe, worse even than the UK's Daily Mail which we don't accept, all we are left with is an article that has perhaps a 50/50 chance of surviving an AfD. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:03, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. I don't know about Bild, I just added it to have a non-Israeli source. The sources are as mainstream media as anything that exists in Israel. E.g. we have Channel 2 profiles/television interview - it's the main evening news program in Israel. Also Nana 10, and a magazine profile from the Maariv youth on there. So I don't see it as a controversial article to approve/patrol - it's a celebrity that gets profiled on mainstream TV and websites and is all over the television at the moment. Just yesterday she got another profile on Channel 2. Avaya1 (talk) 01:31, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Myocardial infarction

The article Myocardial infarction you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Myocardial infarction for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jclemens -- Jclemens (talk) 15:41, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your Request for Comment close

Thank you for your Request for Comment close at Talk:And you are lynching Negroes. I added more to the AFD history at the top of the article talk page. It is simply amazing how many times certain individuals have tried in vain, over and over again, to either get the page to disappear — either by deletion discussion or merge discussion. Hopefully this AFD history template shows those disappear attempts more clearly for future editors. Sagecandor (talk) 04:04, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding List - List of schools in Patna

Hi Winged Blades of Godric, I noticed that you have redirected the List of schools in Patna to Patna. Can you please let me know the reason behind this and how can this list be included as a separate page on Wikipedia? Is there any particular criteria for this to meet? It would be helpful if you can explain this and I will try to improve the List as per standards. Ananprat (talk) 21:05, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ananprat::--

Sorry! That crept inadvertently into my list of desired targets for redirection!Thanks for informing me! But I would be happy if you add a few reliable sources to the article! Winged Blades^Godric 07:47, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Winged Blades of Godric:Thanks. I will add reliable sources to the page.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Driving Under the Influence (song)

You left a comment for me at this closed AfD discussion. I think you were suggesting it was an invalid WP:DEPROD. The original WP:PROD reason given was notability. I DEPRODDED because that couldn't be right with the claim that the song charted. It turns out the song and the artist were a WP:HOAX. If I had not deprodded, the song would have probably been quietly deleted and the hoax artist article would have remained on the Wikipedia. ~Kvng (talk) 13:41, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Kvng::--The artist article??To speak (while drowning in technical details and bureacracy):--Your deprodding was fine!.But don't deprod articles just because the criterion was controversial/wrong.Perform a source search and de-prod iff the article is worth-salvagable!Thanks!Winged Blades^Godric 15:12, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The artist article was speedy deleted when 93 investigated and smelled a hoax while participating in the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Driving Under the Influence (song) AfD discussion.

You may be misunderstanding how WP:PROD works. There is no WP:BEFORE requirement for WP:DEPRODDING. The bureaucracy is set up like this on purpose to make sure proposed deletions can get adequate review. The overall idea is that it should be easier to create than delete. ~Kvng (talk) 17:46, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

These arguments and these logics have been beaten to death at Adam9007's tp.Read through the archives if you wish to evaluate the position of the community on your argument.Winged Blades^Godric 11:54, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Anoptimistix

Hi, have reverted your redirects fo this user's articles for several reasons: firstly I had reviewed them and found that they all had sig cov (more than one paragraph as defined by AFC guidelines) in 2 or more reliable sources and I had therefore passed them, secondly admin Schwede66 has checked every one of these articles when the user applied for autopatrolled rights and did not nominate any of them for deletion or redirect or add any tags, thirdly under BRD the bold editor should start a discussion. In view of the opposition to redirecting the best option is AFD if you wish to pursue deletion, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 17:30, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for moving to AFD Atlantic306 (talk) 17:41, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Atlantic306:---I don't get the autopatrolled bit! He isn't auto-patrolled!Winged Blades^Godric 07:16, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, he recently applied to be autopatrolled and was declined but in the process all of his articles were checked by admin and none were put up for deletion, or redirected, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 14:44, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please double-vet.That was him seeking autopatrolled for another user.I think you know unlike other rights, some-body else may nominate an user for the auto-patrolled right(Sorta RFA style!):)Winged Blades^Godric 11:53, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NSU-Pipe 34 PS motorcar

Hello, I'd like to put in a request for the rescue of the NSU-Pipe 34 PS page recently reviewed and turned into a redirect- while it is not the worlds most outstanding topic, it is nevertheless significant. It was the first 4-wheeled vehicle built by NSU, thus beginning some 50 years of production of that marque's motor cars. On the German wikipedia it is part of a complete set of pages for all the NSU Motorenwerke models over the years, and I would propose that eventually the English wikipedia should have a similar set. Meanwhile the pages for the next 2 models (NSU-Pipe 15/24 PS and NSU-Pipe 25/40 PS) have been reviewed and approved.Yadsalohcin (talk) 12:32, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Yadsalohcin::--

Not done:-- Different wikis have different inclusion standards.I see nil notability for a stand-alone article/stub(??) about the subject.If you have more sources which discuss the notability of the subject in a non-trivial manner, list them and I'm willing to change my mind.Thanks!Winged Blades^Godric 12:37, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hakan Binbaşgil

Just an FYI, but when you're curating pages, try to remember to check whether WikiProject templates have been added to the talk page, and try to find at least the most obvious and add them before marking the article as reviewed. TimothyJosephWood 13:21, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Timothyjosephwood:--Actually, I believe stub-sorting, classifying articles project wise et al are secondary duties of any reviewer.Feel free to inform me of any problems you discover about my editing/NPP activities.Thanks!Winged Blades^Godric 15:45, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I know it's an issue I've seen fail requests for autopatrolled, and I try to use that as a metric for reviewing. TimothyJosephWood 16:12, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Godric!

I edited your userpage. Please forgive me! (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:08, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@The Quixotic Potato:---Forgive!--because you made a helpful edit?

.Thanks! Feel free to venture on my Tp/U.Winged Blades^Godric 16:16, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting AFDs with multiple comments

Hi there. Thanks for helping out at AFD; however, please be more careful with relisting discussions, such as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dragonjaw Mountains. Per WP:RELIST such discussions should only be relisted if consensus is unclear (it isn't in this case) and when a reason for relisting is supplied. So next time, please take the time to explain why you did relist. Regards So Why 06:54, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SoWhy:--Thanks for the info! Not sure why I missed inputting the summary while relisting.I gen. write a relisting comment in such cases.Regrets for the mistake!Winged Blades^Godric 07:01, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

COGIX

Hi, could you be a bit more specific on the reasons behind the deletion proposal? --Gunnar (talk) 19:06, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

   WP:GNG
   If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, 
   it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list.

"Significant coverage" OK: The German CHP sector covers about 30 GW, in the EU it is >100 GW. 
"Reliable" OK: Matthes/Ziesing have published this index first, VKU (association of municipal utilities) payed for and uses it. 
"Sources" do not have to be available online or written in English. OK: There are many sources available. 
"Independent of the subject" OK: I am working in the CHP sector, but I am not one of the two main inventors of the concept.
"Presumed" I presume that the COGIX concept is an interesting topic worth an wiki article, as it is an extension of the spark spread for CHP.

Is the backlog really getting any better?

I see you are only one hour's time zone away from me. You will be very interested in this and may certainly wish to comment there. We need all the help we can get from editors from your part of the world. It's only just over 2 hours away by plane from Th. I really should get over there again, I love the country and it's been too long. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:41, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting the Ambalavasi page

See ownership of content.Editor blocked for edit warring.

It is seen that you have reverted the page Ambalavasi to an earlier version. However, it lacks a lot of information which are necessary and generally expected from the Ambalavasi page. Generally, people search the term Ambalavasi in order to find out various castes coming under this social group. The page to which you reverted does not contain that information properly. It has too many spelling mistakes also. Nobody refer to the caste Pushpaka as Pushpaga. Only in some loose English transliteration, it appears so. But the page to which you reverted uses the term Pushpagan. Further, the classification of temples such as sanketams, private temples, bhagavati temples etc. are not necessary and relevant while describing the Ambalavasi communities. There are a number of castes in the Ambalavasi community. There are disputes in including some of the castes in Ambalavasi group. However, it will be better to show those castes also and mention about the difference of opinion. Please talk before making such reversions. For the time being I am reverting it back. Thank you --पुष्पकः (talk) 13:09, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about needing more volunteers for joint closure on referrer info RfC discussion

Hello again. For notification, I started the discussion about needing more volunteers to help you and Cyberpower678 properly close the ongoing RfC discussion about sending referrer information. I think it's best to wait until one more or a few more volunteers join the teamwork closure. Thoughts? --George Ho (talk) 19:16, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@George Ho:--Yeah, a third volunteer would be fine!Winged Blades^Godric 02:14, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Salutes

Dude... You seriously suck for blanking the salutes page. The value of the internet has now slightly decreased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.77.3.172 (talk) 05:36, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@74.77.3.172:--Thanks!:)Any idea about the exact devaluation?Winged Blades^Godric 08:58, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For any tps,this and this are the concerned revisions.Winged Blades^Godric 08:58, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Opi9516 sockpuppet investigation evidence

With the evidence I provided in the investigation, do you think it's wise to re-request CU to compare all the accounts? jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 23:51, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jd22292:--Will be shortly commenting!Winged Blades^Godric 09:29, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Parisa Mehrkhodavandi

Hi, would you mind explaining your reasoning for closing the AfD as "keep"? There were two "delete" votes (including the nom), one "keep" and one "weak keep". The keep votes were limited to stating that the subject passes WP:Prof criteria C1 (citations) and C2 (Humboldt postdoctoral fellowship). With regards to C1, I pointed out that the subject was the third author of the highly cited publications. With regards to C2, I pointed out that it was a postdoctoral fellowship for which the recipient must apply and which has a relatively high, 33% acceptance rate. Postdoctoral fellowships are explicitly excluded by WP:PROF#C1 (see Specific criteria notes) and hardly fit in with the major awards listed as examples of awards satisfying WP:Prof#C2. Thanks, Rentier (talk) 12:09, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Rentier:--Thanks! Relisted.Winged Blades^Godric 12:19, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Rentier (talk) 12:20, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move closure

[1] Do you need someone to help you complete the move as a NAC? --MASEM (t) 12:35, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Masem:--Actually, I was looking to deal with all the backlogged RM's before I proceeded with all my closed requests.

I have the pagemover flag and will be immediately proceeding with execution of the closes.Thanks for your offer though!Winged Blades^Godric 12:39, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, just wanted to make sure. --MASEM (t) 12:43, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Masem:--No qualms! Can you please use your bits at Michael German?Thanks!Winged Blades^Godric 12:47, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --MASEM (t) 12:51, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Masem:--Thanks!Winged Blades^Godric 13:06, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please revert non-admin close of Christian Garin

The RM clearly does not meet the terms for closure by a non-admin. Also the last poster asked for evidence of personal preference. You closed it before anyone could reply with Garin's https://www.facebook.com/garinofficial/ Please revert your edit and restore the RM. Thank you. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:04, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@In ictu oculi:

Done.It may be prudential to remind you that the last comment in the disc. came nearly a week back.Winged Blades^Godric 14:32, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well with 3 supports and 1 object, one would have expected a move, before the request for new info was made 36 hours before you closed it. But thanks for reverting. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:54, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There were enough valid points for oppose.Basically agree with Cuchullain's interpretation.Also, there is no necessity to consider bolded !votes only!Anyways, it's up:)And interpretations of NAC vary.Winged Blades^Godric 15:56, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sock farms

When working on issues like these, please be discrete when pinging users. According to the claims made by those offering their paid services, there are admins and New Page Reviewers among the paid editors - which under the circumstances is quite possible. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:45, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Kudpung:---Yeah...I hope you got a notification!Winged Blades^Godric 15:47, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Casey Minson

Hi, did you really mean to blank the AfD when relisting it? Maybe a script error? Sandstein 16:51, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Sandstein:--To the best of my knowledge and belief, my sanity was allright at the time and as a rule, could not but put the blame on a script-error!!

Maybe Evad37 will be able to share some more details!Winged Blades^Godric 15:51, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi:--This was par-excellence!Huh?!Winged Blades^Godric 15:51, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If by 'par-excellence' you mean a right total balls-up that made me look arsehat of the decade, you're dead right! :o — fortunavelut luna 16:03, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to WT:XFDC § AfD blanked when relisting

– - Evad37 [talk] 04:09, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Use of WP:G5

The WP:G5 template is only for articles that have been created by blocked or banned users. If it is not known whether the person creating an article has been blocked or banned, please don't use that template. Thanks. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 22:35, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) As Godric knows, there is disagreement amongst admins on this point, and for a 28 sock farm dating back years, getting an admin to review it for G5 makes a lot of sense. Kudpung and DGG are both people that are well respected and hold the view that we can have reasonable certainty of a ban or block for something like this. As for the article that I'm assuming this is about, I've restored the G5 for admin review. If one at their discretion chooses to decline it, I'm sure Godric would likely go to AfD and get a snow case on it. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:41, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

TonyBallioni, check out the result of the other articles that Godric put that template on. All of them were declined. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 22:45, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some were, some weren't from that farm, which is fine. It deserve admin review anyway. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:52, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

TonyBallioni, I'm not sure that World's Lamest Critic, with their extremely low edit count and being a new user, is sufficiently informed of our policies and guidelines in the above context . Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:53, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kudpung, for more context here you can see User_talk:TonyBallioni#Gene_Freidman. I was concerned about the connections at the articles at first, but they do appear to be a good faith contributor. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:56, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Kudpung and TonyBallioni:--Thanks for keeping an eye on my talk!

Winged Blades^Godric 13:45, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@World's Lamest Critic:--I would like you to kindly refrain from participation in any type of pseudo-administrative tasks including but not limited to removal of CSDs et al. In areas of active-warfare:--COI, Sockpuppery; the last thing we want is a relative good-faith newbie getting caught in the cross-fire.Winged Blades^Godric 13:45, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re G5:As much as we like to abide by the rule-books, the greatest rule is ignore all rules.Winged Blades^Godric 13:45, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll pass that message along to the admins who declined your other other WP:G5 deletion requests. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 14:55, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@World's Lamest Critic:--Ad libitum!Winged Blades^Godric 16:34, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

P.S - It was Janam Janam

Correction it was Janam Janam Anoptimistix Let's Talk 05:08, 31 July 2017 (UTC)And yes I want to inform you that the consensus for Jana Janam was achieved, the result was merge. Please perform merge, as I would be on and off Wikipedia. Thanks have a lovely day[reply]

@Anoptimistix:--First of all, new threads at any talk-page goes down at the bottom of all existing threads, not up.Secondly, I will not be performing the merge.Winged Blades^Godric 07:25, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello you may need to revert your redirect of Nari Gursahani Law College

Hi there ! This is to remind you that few days back you performed redirect of Nari Gursahani Law College, you may need to redirect it back please check it's talk page Talk Page of Nari Gursahani Law College]. The article was retained from CSD. So it cannot be redirect this way,next time please check talk page before performing redirect. Anoptimistix Let's Talk 05:06, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replying soon.Winged Blades^Godric 07:25, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know of any rule stating--An article which is not deemed to be speedied can't be reverted.So, I won't be reverting myself..But obviouisly, you're free to do that.Winged Blades^Godric 16:39, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You did well

About regenerating the Template to delete part of Great power  article.A lot of peope didn't agrre with it in the history and Italy and India are excluded without a clear reason.It's an original and very partial research  that part of article.Benniejets (talk) 08:18, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Thanks Benniejets (talk) 08:21, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]