Star Garnet

Please join the discussion at Talk:United States House of Representatives elections, 2008#Charts.—Markles 16:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

 

An editor has nominated Deaths in 2008, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deaths in 2008 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 18:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I already cleaned up Deaths in December 2006. Prior to that month it's a mess, a real dog's dinner. Redlinks aplenty, many nationalities missing, format problems etc. There's a challenge waiting there ... I have thought about it from time to time, but kept putting it off. Perhaps you might like to begin with Deaths in November 2006 and see how it goes? It's probably easier to do one day at a time, breaking up the task into smaller units. If you find that it's a do-able task, then I will try to find the time (and patience) to join in on some other months. Regards, WWGB (talk) 02:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

I would appreciate you NOT editing my user page. If you notice something is out of date you may mention it on my Talk page.DerbyCountyinNZ (talk) 10:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

A request for comment has been initiated at Talk:List of the verified oldest people. As you have been involved in the issue, you may wish to comment there. Cheers, CP 00:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

  Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Deaths in April 2008. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Xp54321 (talk) 21:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Have a look here and New Zealand. Read them and learn from them. I concede that 'New Zealander' sounds cumbersome, but nevertheless it is correct, and as such should be used in an encyclopeadic article. If the word really upsets you that much and you want to use an alternative, then maybe try 'New Zealand-born'. Finally, I took the effort to enter a hidden comment asking that any edit such as your's be explained on a discussion page; if you are editing in good faith, please make some effort to argue your change with citations and/or examples rather than the somewhat meaningless 'wrong context' in your edit summary. Mannafredo (talk) 18:30, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it does sound cumbersome, but the main reason that I would change that is that that is WWGB's opinion on the matter Star Garnet (talk) 18:40, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Murdoch's article begins "Colin Albert Murdoch MNZM (6 February 1929 – 4 May 2008) was a New Zealand pharmacist and veterinarian". Why, then, would his death notice not read "Colin Murdoch, 79, New Zealand inventor ... "? Why is New Zealand inventor any different to New Zealand pharmacist? Would you describe Helen Clark as the New Zealander Prime Minister? WWGB (talk) 22:24, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

But for this, I would have argued that both articles were wrong, and that just because something sounds cumbersome, does not mean it isn't correct. Read the first line of this article. Regards, Mannafredo (talk) 08:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi Star Garnet. Re our "edit war" over Fred J. Taylor (only joking), there are many people who emigrate to Australia without becoming Australian citizens. Their status is permanent resident but not citizen. (I know because my wife is in this category). There is nothing in the article to suggest that Taylor ever became an Australian citizen, hence it is not appropriate to refer to him as Australian. The fact that Taylor returned to live in the United Kingdom suggests that he never renounced his British citizenship. That's why I would just refer to him as British. Regards, WWGB (talk) 01:35, 20 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the insight! Star Garnet (talk) 02:05, 20 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I didn't realise that Howard Dill already redirects to Atlantic Giant when I reverted. I hate those dumb pages that redirect to something else. It makes Howard Dill look like a blue link when there is no article about him. I look forward to his entry being deleted in one month! Regards, WWGB (talk) 14:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi, as some of your past edits have inspired me to ask the above question, I thought I might pass you a heads-up to my edit on the Wikipedia talk:Notability page. I'm putting this on WWGB's talk page also. Regards, Mannafredo (talk) 13:22, 23 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Do you have a source describing him as a peace activist? --RaiderAspect (talk) 03:10, 25 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

If you do not have a source, I must ask you to cease editing the entry to claim he was a "peace activist". --RaiderAspect (talk) 15:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I curious as to why you are removing redlinked names from this page? Is there some sort of guideline behind this? Surely if a persons death is covered in obituaries by mainstream media then this would confer notability and these redlinks should on day become blue? Indeed, I myself have seen redlinks on these lists in the past of figures I am interested in an created articles for them. Why therefore are you removing them?--Jackyd101 (talk) 00:17, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

The established rule for the recent deaths is that redlinks should remain for a month after the date of death. The general belief is that an article would have been created if they were significant enough to warrant one. Happy editing! Star Garnet (talk) 00:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Fair enough, although it seems a bit odd to me. Presumably that means that if people want to see any redlinks from more than a month ago they have to go trawling through the history to find them. Where is this rule laid down, I'd be interested in seeing it?--Jackyd101 (talk) 09:17, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Tell me about it. That's exactly the point I was making when I brought the subject up on the notabilty talk pages, here. Mannafredo (talk) 09:22, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

You might want to see this. I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 01:44, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

I also note the statement "when considering adding red links to lists or disambiguation pages, editors are encouraged to write the article first. Red links should not be created for topics that are unlikely ever to have articles" which comes from the same source. Regards, WWGB (talk) 02:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

The section Editorofthewiki links to leans much more to the retention of red-links in death pages than the statement you have chosen above. Your statement is misleading on two levels. 1. 'editors are encouraged...' to write the article first. The article wasn't written first and we can't go back in time and change that. Live with it, it's no reason to then delete the link to person who belongs on a 'list of notable people who have died'. 2. '...should not be created for topics that are unlikely ever to have articles...' relates, as stated, to things like 'every chapter in a book', not people who have more or less been proved notable by their appearance in other WPs. Mannafredo (talk) 09:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

"it's no reason to then delete the link to person who belongs on a 'list of notable people who have died' ". How do we know they are notable? Because the authoring editor claims? How do I get to challenge that assertion of notability?

Conversely, if I write

• Michael Meehan, 53, British backhoe loader driver, machine plunged over cliff. [1]

then the entry cannot be deleted? If it can be deleted, who decides? WWGB (talk) 12:16, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

'How do we know they are notable?'. We look around the media available to us; google news, newspapers, other wikis etc, and then make the call to keep, dump (both are perfectly bold) or go looking for consensus. Each and every case should be addressed on its merits alone. Some should survive as a red-links and some deleted. If creating a stub is easy, then the media search I describe here is even easier. Although a stub is preferable, it should not be a prerequisite to recognising notability. Systematic deletion of 'all' red-links just because they are red, especially in list-type articles/pages, seems to me uncalled for. I would also argue that it is irrelevant whether the red-link has been red for one month or five years. Regards, Mannafredo (talk) 13:20, 3 June 2008 (UTC).Reply

There is no way to decide what to keep and what not to fairly, so the only clean option is to set a deadline for the creation of an article. Besides, there is no point in making a stub that is orphaned apart from the deaths page just to keep it on the list. Star Garnet (talk) 21:36, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Please note that many articles I have created were, upon creation, not linked except for the recent death page; Mary Meader, which I added the first link (to Deaths in 2008), is currently at GAC. The community should decide which redlinks should be included and the ones not to include (the one WWGB provided would be uncontroversial). Just because it doesn't have an article doesn't mean its not notable, and it could deprive the encyclopedia of content if we remove the one and only link. I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 21:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

I have to say that this sounds quite sensible. For example, I recently added Reg Flewin to the Deaths in May 2008. Flewin was a top professional footballer in England during the 1930s and 1940s who clearly qualifies for notability on several different criteria. Under the current rules however, unless someone creates the article in the next 20 days (and I had no intention of doing it myself until I read this discussion), his name will be deleted and it will be up to someone who creates the article at some point in the future to add the name back to the correct deaths page. It seems to me that this is a bit of a waste of time for all involved - every person listed at the deaths page has to given a reliable source mentioning their death and indicating their notability already, so I don't really see the need for this extra round of deletions.--Jackyd101 (talk) 09:26, 4 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

As another thought, would it not be more sensible to list all month old names that have no article at Wikipedia:Requested articles and allow the people there to decide whether or not to create an article on them using the source provided on the page here? If they create it then these lists will be all blue and if they do not then the name can be deleted from here then.--Jackyd101 (talk) 00:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi, the convention in UK is to refer to County Cricket clubs as just name of the county, e.g. "Yorkshire", so I've reverted your addition of "Club" as it would jar with a Brit. --Rodhullandemu 15:36, 6 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

The only thing is that the wording seems out of context for those who don't know the workings of cricket. Your call. Star Garnet (talk) 15:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Can you explain your comment on the AfD page for Appeasement of Hitler? I am very interested. Thanks. 129.71.73.243 (talk) 21:59, 26 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

It is not good form to revert an edit without explanation. Could you explain why you feel the Manual of Style on Capital letters, which is clear that official job titles are proper nouns deserving of capitalisation, does not apply to this particular article? There is an ongoing debate at Talk:Deaths in 2008. Sam Blacketer (talk) 08:50, 6 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, my revert was a mistake. — Xavier, 22:26, 6 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. Star Garnet (talk) 22:27, 6 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

I know you don't like to use edit summaries, but reverting someone's edit without any explanation is a little rude. Can you explain how this guy is notable? WP:NOTNEWS. Tan ǀ 39 17:04, 9 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

His notability streams from his being a CEO, and even more from the nature of his death at the Beijing Olypmics will probably lead to an article for him in the near future. Compared to many people listed on the deaths page, he has a fair amount of significance. Star Garnet (talk) 17:08, 9 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

I disagree; CEOs are not inherently notable, and you're presuming that he will be the focus of significant coverage (HIM, not the event, which has already obviously had significant coverage). The person needs to be notable in their own right to be included on here, not just a participant in a news event. Tan ǀ 39 17:10, 9 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Even though he may not be overly significant he will be removed from the deaths list if an article is not written for him within a month. And if those such as murder victims recieve articles, I believe it is worth giving this guy a chance. Star Garnet (talk) 17:14, 9 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hm, okay. I guess I want notability first, inclusion second... but it's not really hurting anything, is it? Thanks for sourcing it. Tan ǀ 39 17:18, 9 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I guess that I have to say that I believe that many people listed on the deaths pages aren't really worthy of an article, but you just have to please as many people as you can. I wouldn't write an article for Bachman, but over the months that I've watched the deaths pages, I've learned that someone like Bachman would just be added again after they've been deleted. Star Garnet (talk) 17:22, 9 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Please see Talk:Deaths in 2008#Bare references. Regards, WWGB (talk) 21:43, 3 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi Star Garnet,

I noticed you reverted things on Sam Tingle.

Here is what I am trying to communicate, so maybe we can work together for a good solution: Sam Tingle raced as a Rhodesian per the FIA in Formula One motorsport. Therefore he was a Rhodesian. Rhodesia inconveniently changed its name to Zimbabwe, but Tingle never raced as a Zimbabwean, so he was a Rhodesian.

Any ideas how to condense this while listing Tingle as a Rhodesian per the FIA? -- Guroadrunner (talk) 22:07, 28 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

I actually think that it shouldn't matter, and that he should be listed as Zimbabwean. Scottish, Nothern Irish, and Welch footballers are listed as British, and ex-Soviet athletes are listed are Russian or whichever ex-Soviet state they hail from. Since Rhodesia is now Zimbabwe, this standard should be applied to all sports notables. Star Garnet (talk) 23:01, 28 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sorry I undid all of your revisions. I will see what I can do about putting them back.--Dr who1975 (talk) 23:19, 8 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

It looks like the IP guy put all your edits back. I compared to make sure. Sorry again.--Dr who1975 (talk) 01:43, 9 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I don't want to take our friendly 'edit war' any further, especially since Donald Luddington may well be a deleted redlink in one month's time anyway. It frustrates me that there is a difference between his titles and terms at worldstatesman.org and at rulers.org. Do you know if one site is more reliable than the other? It just seems funny that he could have two titles/positions at the same time. Regards, WWGB (talk) 06:10, 30 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

I managed to find about six backing worldstatemen and none backing rulers, but that doesn't mean much; however, I did discover that he had been knighted. Star Garnet (talk) 00:56, 31 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for removing Austin Denney from the deaths for January 20. I realize he was a football player who had a lot of notability, but that you had removed him was of great relief to him and his family, whom I have know since the mid 1970s. Your deletion is greatly appreciated on this. Chris (talk) 14:02, 23 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

I entirely disagree with edits like this one. I've brought this up on the talk page. Michael Hardy (talk) 04:54, 1 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

The fact that you disagree with a particular edit does not make it "vandalism". Michael Hardy (talk) 18:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I would hope that you would know standard policy by now. Determine consensus before making a change in long-standing policy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Star Garnet (talk • contribs)

I wasn't proposing to change a policy, but rather to create a policy where there was none before. (If such a policy existed, please point it out to me.) It differs from what had been customary, and in that it resembles edits I make every day to articles, in which I change material that's been there for a long time. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Star Garnet, it was never proposed that months be split as you implemented. What editors wanted was for ALL of February deaths to remain on the Deaths in 2009 page until 3-7 days had elapsed, then to transfer the whole of February to Deaths in February 2009. That is how I have implemented the suggestion. By March 7, all February deaths should then be moved to Deaths in February 2009. Regards, WWGB (talk) 11:50, 3 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

IT looks like we were inthere the same time... it's weird... I didn;t get an edit conflict.--Dr who1975 (talk) 16:51, 27 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Good work with reformatting that list! Makes it much easier to use. I think you already have seen that I added a column. There are two entries I wasn't sure about. Would you have a look at: Talk:Senate_of_Canada#Senators_appointed_in_1965. -- User:Docu

Thanks for your answer. -- User:Docu

Thanks so much for working on the page. Great start so far. I wanted to do something similar after I initially created the page, but the job seemed so overwhelming. Thanks for taking over! Memworking (talk) 16:17, 20 May 2009 (UTC)MemworkingReply

I left the incorrect note because I didn't want to make an edit just to change a note... I guess once I'd made the error I was also wondering if anyone would catch it. I see you picked up on Don Young moving today too... good catch.--Dr who1975 (talk) 02:53, 30 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure what your proposal is. Could you explain? -Rrius (talk) 04:26, 14 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

• I see you added Alan Dixon with the death of Bellmon. That raises the question of where you get this great information and whether we can add the next few in a comment at the end of the list so they are right there when the next person on the list dies. -Rrius (talk) 01:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:34, 12 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi Star Garnet. Just wanted to let you know that I finally responded to your comment over on my talk page; haven't logged in in a while. Cheers! Qqqqqq (talk) 22:33, 12 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

 

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of oldest surviving members of the House of Representatives. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of oldest surviving members of the House of Representatives. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:08, 17 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for reaching out to me to defend List of oldest surviving members of the House of Representatives. Although I have gone into semi-retirement following the debacle of a debate over List of former members of the United States House of Representatives, which forced me to split the article and took all the passion for my years of work away, I appreciate the opportunity to defend the work and scholarship of others from the notability police. Valadius (talk) 12:49, 17 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi could you explain this edit? What is "general Arabic consensus" and what is your source for it? Thanks and Cheers, CP 00:53, 9 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

 

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 17:48, 19 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Under WP:MUSICBIO, band members are redirected to the band article unless they are individually notable. I have always cut some slack in this area, but you are right - death notices for band members could be deleted if they have no article. I am not aware of any particular discussion around this topic. Regards, WWGB (talk) 02:02, 13 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

I told Tommieboi that I sent an e-mail to the clerk of the United States House of Representatives about Robert McIntosh's death. Hoefully, they will come through. I did this once before-Thanks-RFD (talk) 19:23, 11 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

They came through!-RFD (talk) 16:55, 14 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

What source do you have to state that Mohieddin is "legally" dead? --Dangermouse600 (talk) 09:14, 16 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm still interested in the answer to my question. What is your source to declare that Mohieddin is dead? --Dangermouse600 (talk) 23:25, 11 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

As now is clear, who had no source to add his death. Not able to read the Arabic Language you added a source you did not understand, washing away those who pointed out that the passing of Mohieddin wasn't said in this source. Don't get me wrong - I appreciate your work in Wikipedia, but this was bullshit! Please be more careful in the future. Kind Regards --Dangermouse600 (talk) 08:58, 17 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

I love false accusations... Star Garnet (talk) 17:22, 19 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dean of the United States Senate is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dean of the United States Senate until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Francophonie&Androphilie (talk) 19:52, 4 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Many thanks for the redirect. I agree that the combination of initials and firstname dont go together. The person best known as Desmond Fernando was a distinguished lawyer. This DF was better known as BDJS Fernando. however the previous page under that name was deleted speedily mainly because I was not good enough an editor to put in relevant references and not because of lack of notabilty. Is there any way of renaming as BDJS Fernando?

many thanks Liannalianna (talk) 18:25, 23 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Hyun Soong-jong. The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our verifiability policy. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:11, 30 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of ski areas and resorts in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Idlewild, California (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 5 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

I think you had better read WP:BARONET for appropriate guidelines on article naming (yes, we do use "Sir Y Z, xth Baronet" for articles on baronets, whether modern or historic, that need disambiguation) and also WP:MOVE#How to move a page if you decide to move another page in the future (but please, not this one!). -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:35, 14 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited College Curling USA, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Unity College. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 10 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of longest-living state leaders is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of longest-living state leaders until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Legacypac (talk) 21:48, 29 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dirham, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Durham. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:21, 20 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nevada Senate, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Derek Armstrong. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:24, 26 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of living centenarians, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page China News. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:05, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Regarding our edit war on List of Game of Thrones characters, most TV show cast pages now have the appearance table at the bottom as the table becomes too large (depending on the number of seasons) and takes away from the point of the article - descriptions of the cast. This information should precede the appearance table.

A 'recurring' appearance is appearing more than one time in a season while not being part of the main ensemble. If an actor/character only appears once in a season, they cannot be recurring - this makes it a 'guest' appearance.

I have updated the table to include lots of major recurring characters who were not on it before the edit. Please do not revert the table. This table and it's format is in line with other tv show wikitables. BSCD128 (talk) 05:25, 18 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Which shows? There are very few comparable to GOT, and most that are (ST, etc.) don't have tables at all. When there are tables, they are almost always at the top, as they are generally a focal point of the article. This show has too many people with opinions on this show to have an arbitrary standard for who would qualify for the recurring table. Added to how ugly the table you mangled is, and your edits border on vandalism. Star Garnet (talk) 06:09, 18 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

It isn't hard to decide who has a recurring role - it is quite simple - any actor who has appeared more than once in a season but is not part of the main cast. That's a recurring role, not much to debate about.

The table layout is exactly the same as it was before - not sure how it's 'ugly' or 'mangled' now. More content has been added - that's it.

Not sure how updating information on a table is considered vandalism.

I'm fine with leaving the table at the top of the page, but do not undo the updates to the table. Many major recurring characters have been added including updates for season six.

Which shows? Every one I can think of, except maybe Dexter. BSCD128 (talk) 06:27, 18 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

 

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of Game of Thrones characters. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Alex|The|Whovian^? 06:30, 18 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Please see: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cannabis#Can_we_file_states_only_by_.2Ahighest.2A_category_in_Template:Cannabis_in_the_United_States.3F. 06:44, 30 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk • contribs)

Can you please show me where Samuel Conti is still on the court? I know FJC still says he's in senior status but I don't see him listed as an active member of the court in any of it's divisions. According to this press release he retired in October 2015.

Is there evidence to the contrary?

Thanks Snickers2686 (talk) 16:02, 24 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Both Judges Fullam and Harvey have retired and are still listed as Incumbent. WatersR 13:54, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that. Compare the lead of article "Monica Puig Marchán". No accent on the first name, but accent on the matronym? Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:59, 9 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of members of the United States House of Representatives who died in the 2000s is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of members of the United States House of Representatives who died in the 2000s until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. -KAP03(^{Talk • Contributions}) 00:22, 21 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

 

Hello, Star Garnet. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is The Wikipedia Library - Newspapers.com.
Message added 17:04, 10 March 2017 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 17:04, 10 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Greetings! I've been sorting through new stub articles and noticed that, on several of your creations, there's a stub category assigned without the corresponding stub template. (For example, Eero Salonen had Category:Basketball biography stubs and a generic {{stub}} template.) The preferred method for adding a stub article to a category is to assign, for example, {{basketball-bio-stub}}, which will then automatically place the article in the Category:Basketball biography stubs. If you're not sure of the template format for the specific stub category, you can put the {{stub}} template on the article and assign a relevant category such as Category:Basketball players, and the stub sorters will know where to place it amongst the stubs. I hope I'm making sense - just trying to save both of us some work. Cheers! Her Pegship (talk) 22:56, 10 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I'm Boleyn. Star Garnet, thanks for creating Silas C. Hatch!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Unclear that he meets WP:NPOL or WP:GNG.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Boleyn (talk) 14:38, 29 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of cities in Ohio, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Columbus and Oakwood, Ohio (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:08, 29 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your recent edits. There was a consensus decision some time ago that the subject of an article such as "Death of X", "Shooting of X" etc is considered notable for inclusion in the Deaths lists, even without a biographical article. WWGB (talk) 00:51, 8 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

WWGB, okay, thanks. Star Garnet (talk) 00:58, 8 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

 

A tag has been placed on Category:LGBT sportspeople from Burundi requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 20:34, 2 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

 

A tag has been placed on Category:LGBT sportspeople from Kenya requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:03, 3 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

 

A tag has been placed on Category:LGBT sportspeople from Equatorial Guinea requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:26, 10 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

I just wanted to let you know that on your Gitmo page, you linked to Jim David instead of Jim David (American football). -- Bait30  ^Talk? 00:04, 16 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

 

The article Earliest serving United States senator has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This data has only a single primary source. However, even if the data were thoroughly verified, there is no evidence that "earliest serving United States senator" is a notable topic. The data seems too WP:INDISCRIMINATE for Wikipedia.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BenKuykendall (talk) 02:57, 3 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Earliest serving United States senator is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Earliest serving United States senator until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. BenKuykendall (talk) 03:00, 3 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Please note that another language in not a reliable source. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:55, 8 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited José del Carmen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bogata (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:24, 8 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

You might want to actually read the named articles in the constitution. Nowhere does it say that the President of the Presidium is the head of state, however, article 100 of the Constitution (as amended in August 2019, which Wikisource has not updated) does explicitly name the Chairman of the State Affairs Commission as "the supreme leader of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea who represents the statey." See this [2] In addition, the duties of the SAC chairman outlined by the constitution far exceeds that of the President of the Presidium, for example "Article 104.

The Chairman of the State Affairs Commission of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has the following duties and authority to"

   direct the overall affairs of the State;
   personally guide the work of the State Affairs Commission;
   make public the laws and ordinances of the Supreme People’s Assembly and the major decrees and decisions of the State Affairs Commission;
   appoint or remove key cadres of the State;
   appoint or recall the diplomatic representatives resident in other countries;
   ratify or rescind major treaties concluded with other countries;
   exercise the right of granting special pardon;
   proclaim a state of emergency, a state of war and mobilization order within the country;
   organize and direct the National Defence Committee in wartime.

--Tærkast (Discuss) 15:23, 15 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

 

A tag has been placed on Category:LGBT Muay Thai practitioners requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:07, 21 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for creating Category:LGBT skateboarders back on 19 August 2019. I moved it to Category:LGBTQ skateboarders in order to be able to include skaters such as Leo Baker, who identifies as queer/nonbinary but whose specific sexual orientation is unknown and really not relevant. Hope you don’t have any strong objection to this  —PowerPCG5 (talk) 00:37, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Peter W. Hall, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rutland, Vermont.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 12 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Why are you removing an official judicial photo just for a "better" image? Snickers2686 (talk) 17:42, 14 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Snickers2686 A blurry thumbnail photo? A photo like that should only be the lead photo when necessary (so, fair use or when nothing else is available). You can of course replace it with his US attorney photo or insert the thumbnail below. Star Garnet (talk) 17:58, 14 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi Star Garnet. When tagging orphaned fair use files, could you please use {{subst:Orfud}} instead of {{Db-f5}}? Thanks, FASTILY 22:27, 18 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Fastily: No problem. Star Garnet (talk) 22:40, 18 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Arlin Adams, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lewis Powell.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 27 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, Star Garnet. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:List of former United States territorial courts, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occurred, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:01, 9 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, Star Garnet. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:E. J. Dawne, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occurred, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:03, 10 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

I don't know if You have seen this: [3] . As You were active in the first "defence" of the article, I just wanted to inform You (and a couple of other users) about this. StjepanHR (talk) 20:37, 7 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi Star Garnet. Thanks for this edit replacing a blacklisted source. Which blacklist is it on? I searched the links from WP:RELIABLE but couldn’t find it. Thanks —Northernhenge (talk) 22:41, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Northernhenge: Newsbeezer is part of a growing list of sites that have been placed on the MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist because their content is copyvio and often unreliable. They take other organizations' content and translate and/or synonym-swap (often changing the meaning of the text, even if unintentionally) to generate their content. Thankfully, they often link directly to where they copied their content from, as in the case of the Maja Francis article, so it's relatively easy to make a proper citation. Star Garnet (talk) 22:57, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Joseph F. Smith (Pennsylvania politician).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:30, 19 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Santa Cruz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Santa Cruz.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi! Your InternetArchiveBot batch job (#9512) has been stalled for most of a week, and it's sitting there taking up one of the bot's three channels - could you maybe please kill it so the bot can take care of other jobs? Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 01:54, 28 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Your list of oldest leaders is missing Biljana Plavšić who was in Bosnia's collective presidency briefly (including the period after independence) and is older than many featured leaders. --Killuminator (talk) 15:36, 7 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Killuminator: It's been established for a long while that members of ruling collective qualify for the unclear status list only if there is no clear leader among them. So per consensus, neither Plavšić nor the older Franjo Boras [hr] are 'missing'. Star Garnet (talk) 19:11, 7 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, Star Garnet. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:66th Washington State Legislature, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:07, 31 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, Star Garnet. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:65th Washington State Legislature, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:07, 31 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Hello, Star Garnet. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "List of former United States territorial courts".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:58, 15 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello

I just want to thank you or your passion for uploading pictures for federal judges. I have uploaded numerous pics including most of President Biden's nominees, but some of the older judges are harder to get pictures for. The senate judiciary committee website videos for the nominees don't play on their site so I'm happy to see you have been able to find some of the judges' pics I have not been able to find. I think between you & I, we can get most of the circuit court & a majority of the district court pics uploaded.

There is one remaining circuit court judges that have not announced retirement that I have not been able to find a picture for;

Harris Hartz

All of the Obama, Trump & Biden district court judges have pictures. Here are the active GW Bush judges that do not have pictures.

Clay Daniel Land, Jay Christopher Zainey, Christopher Charles Conner, David Charles Godbey, Jose E. Martinez, James Edgar Kinkeade, Alia Moses,Thomas Alexander Varlan, Philip Peter Simon, Louise Wood Flanagan, Earl Leroy Yeakel III, Robert David Proctor, Ronald Allen White, Marcia Ann Cain Crone, Kenneth Michael Karas, Paul Steven Diamond, Jane Ellen Jackson Boyle, Robert Bryan Harwell, Timothy Carroll Batten Sr., Thomas Edward Johnston, Aida Milagros Delgado-Colón, Susan Davis Wigenton, Renee Marie Bumb, Thomas Lamson Ludington, Gregory Kent Frizzell, Robert James Jonker, Timothy D. DeGiusti, William Lindsay Osteen Jr., Martin Karl Reidinger, Sharion Marie Aycock, Robert Michael Dow Jr., Joseph Normand Laplante, Thomas David Schroeder, James Randal Hall, Mark Steven Davis, Paul G. Gardephe, Glenn Thomas Suddaby, Cathy Seibel, Eric Franklin Melgren

Thanks again

MIAJudges (talk) 22:25, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, Star Garnet. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:64th Washington State Legislature, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:01, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, Star Garnet. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:67th Washington State Legislature, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:01, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Hello, Star Garnet. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "66th Washington State Legislature".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 20:26, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Hello, Star Garnet. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "65th Washington State Legislature".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 20:26, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Hello, Star Garnet. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "List of former United States territorial courts".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:56, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, Star Garnet. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:List of contested elections to the United States Congress, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:07, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Hello, Star Garnet. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "List of contested elections to the United States Congress".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:40, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Anthony Steinbock, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 19 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

I notice you have been making many page moves with the rationale "common name" eg in the past 24 hours:

• Stephen Benton Elkins --> Stephen B. Elkins
• John Tyler Morgan --> John T. Morgan
• Joseph Lafayette Rawlins --> Joseph L. Rawlins
• William Freeman Vilas --> William F. Vilas
• Shelby Moore Cullom --> Shelby M. Cullom
• John James Ingalls --> John J. Ingalls

It just seems like shortening the middle name by default, then justifying the page move as "common name" with no real rationale why that's actually the common name. -- GreenC 13:12, 14 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

@GreenC: And there are roughly 150 more senators' pages left to move to finally bring them into compliance with WP:MIDDLE ("Adding given names, or their abbreviations, merely for disambiguation purposes (if that format of the name is not commonly used to refer to the person) is not advised."). This is a relic of the pages largely being named after their congressional directory biographies, which use the most complete name available in congressional files, and the status of most of them as some of the oldest pages on WP while not drawing significant attention. I expect roughly 20 moves to require discussion largely due to disambiguators; I'm saving those till the end for what will hopefully be a bulk discussion. Thanks to the era in which most of these improperly named pages were well-known (1850-1950), roughly 80%-90% of the moves will result in First M. Last, rather than First Last. (I'm sure there are some currently at First M. Last that should be a First Last, and vice versa, but I won't be diving into that except for a few brought to my attention by a comparison with [4] and other states' corresponding pages.) There are a handful that will end up at F. M. Last, but I avoid that unless it's overwhelming. I've already moved most of those that went by their middle names, although there are at least three on the docket left to move to F. Middle Last. I rely primarily on newspapers.com in determining a common name, aided principally by WorldCat and HathiTrust. While I run through permutations of names and nicknames, this particular set of moves, with minimal exceptions, match the senate's list linked above (note that while the senate's historian controls 90% of the list, recent senators have control over how their name is displayed; thus Katie Boyd Britt rather than Katie Britt, Gordon Douglas Jones rather than Doug Jones, and Thomas Hawley Tuberville rather than Tommy Tuberville). Star Garnet (talk) 17:31, 14 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Ok great, sounds like you are on top of things and know what you are doing more than me :) Wanted to check and make sure as some users might have a more simple view (ie. change all middle names to abbreviated). Thanks for noticing this issue and making corrections and taking the time to explain. -- GreenC 18:20, 14 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

No problem, it's good to check in on such things, and perhaps my attempt to WP:FIXIT is trying to be a bit too efficient; I could leave a note on the corresponding talk pages before moving. Star Garnet (talk) 18:43, 14 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Whenever Featured articles are moved, it will get flagged for attention, as is currently happening with William O. Bradley at Wikipedia:Featured_articles/mismatches (a report I wrote). Same with Good articles at Wikipedia:Good_articles/mismatches, but that report is less significant in terms of concern. -- GreenC 14:39, 19 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Please return the page to its previous name and engage in a discussion. As you can see on the talk page, I started a discussion in 2021, in which you are welcomed to participate. Unilaterally changing the name of a contested page is not acceptable.--User:Namiba 02:08, 17 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Namiba: There's nothing unacceptable about reverting a move that was based on faulty info (using sources that commonly use full names to demonstrate that a full name is a common name). To expand on what I said on the Brewster talk page, here are the newspaper mentions broken out by era:

This is clearly a case of WP:NAMECHANGES where the changed name was/is widely used by RS and the change was dramatic. Ralph Owen Brewster certainly is not his common name, and Ralph O. Brewster ceased being his common name in the early 1940s. If you still feel that there is a better page title, you're welcome to propose it. Star Garnet (talk) 04:15, 17 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yes, there certainly is something wrong with moving a page without first participating in a discussion about it while a discussion is clearly needed. You can make one determination about the name and I may make another. We should be building consensus, which you clearly did not do. So again, I ask that you move the name back to where it was for years and let's discuss it on the talk page.--User:Namiba 04:20, 17 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

As WP:COMMONNAME states, "In determining which of several alternative names is most frequently used, it is useful to observe the usage of major international organizations, major English-language media outlets, quality encyclopedias, geographic name servers, major scientific bodies, and notable scientific journals." The name used by obituaries is much less important than how he is remembered today, which is overwhelmingly not Owen Brewster.--User:Namiba 04:27, 17 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hawley (surname), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Justice Hawley, Senator Hawley and General Hawley.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Can I just point out to you that the Inter Language Link format {{in lang|xx}} (where xx is the language code) should exist outside (that is, after) the source URL and headline formatting? I have been through all your entries today correcting those errors. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 23:01, 5 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Hi Star Garnet, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled user right to your account. This means that pages you create will automatically be marked as 'reviewed', and no longer appear in the new pages feed. Autopatrolled is assigned to prolific creators of articles, where those articles do not require further review, and may have been requested on your behalf by someone else. It doesn't affect how you edit; it is used only to manage the workload of new page patrollers.

Since the articles you create will no longer be systematically reviewed by other editors, it is important that you maintain the high standard you have achieved so far in all your future creations. Please also try to remember to add relevant WikiProject templates, stub tags, categories, and incoming links to them, if you aren't already in the habit; user scripts such as Rater and StubSorter can help with this. As you have already shown that you have a strong grasp of Wikipedia's core content policies, you might also consider volunteering to become a new page patroller yourself, helping to uphold the project's standards and encourage other good faith article writers.

Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! ~Swarm~ ^{sting} 16:12, 11 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Hello Star Garnet!

• The New Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
• We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
• Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
• Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
• If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.

Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 07:51, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Star Garnet. Thank you for your work on Idaho Constitutional Convention. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for writing the article on Wikipedia! I genuinely appreciate your efforts in creating the article on Wikipedia and expanding the sum of human knowledge in Wikipedia. Wishing you and your family a great day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 12:54, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello, thanks for your edit to Buckhead, Morgan County, Georgia, but please make sure the footnote agrees with your additions; I've added a 2020 census reference there. Graham87 (talk) 05:53, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Mach61 (talk) 03:24, 29 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Why are there so many changes on article names of a lot of elected politicians and making their middle names into initials? NewDealChief (talk) 11:30, 17 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

It is quite rare that a person's full name is their WP:COMMONNAME. There are exceptions, like William Howard Taft and Philip Seymour Hoffman, but they are just that (exceptions). Oftentimes, articles with a First Middle Last title are named such because they were labeled as such in an encyclopedia or database, where that is the common format, and nobody bothered to check what their common name (as gauged through newspapers, books, etc.) actually was/is. As for why most get moved from First Middle Last to First M. Last rather than First Last (or F. Middle Last vs. Middle Last), a) up until the 1950s, most American public figures were commonly known as such, and b) even if they're not the most common form of someone's name, they're generally the next-most common, and provide WP:NATURAL disambiguation rather than parenthetical. Star Garnet (talk) 21:56, 18 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Please see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_December_18#Ungulates,_again. – Fayenatic London 19:39, 18 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Hello, Star Garnet. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "List of former United States territorial courts".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:48, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I am also curious about what your plans for this draft are. Cheers! BD2412 T 01:27, 18 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

You definitely seem to know more about this than me, I had a question about a nominee of Obama's; they appear to have gotten a rating of Q/WQ without any majority/minority subheadings, are you familiar with this? I'm not sure how to sort it. Nevermore27 (talk) 15:34, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Darrin P. Gayles is the nom btw

@Nevermore27: I'm not sure in this instance. Possibilities include: 1) a transcription error, 2) a tie where they forgot to list a recusal, and 3) a tie when there was a vacancy on the board and they didn't bother to have a re-vote when they got back to full capacity. I'd probably sort it between WQm/Qmin and Qm/WQmin. Star Garnet (talk) 16:39, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:28, 23 October 2024 (UTC) Reply

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC) Reply