User talk:Finngall

Archives

Spring 2007 Summer 2007 Fall '07/Winter '08 2008-2012 2014 2015 2016-2017 2018-2019 2020-2021

6 November 2024
From the editors: Editing Wikipedia should not be a crime News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation shares ANI lawsuit updates; first admin elections appoint eleven sysops; first admin recalls opened; temporary accounts coming soon? In the media: An old scrimmage, politics and purported libel Special report: Wikipedia editors face litigation, censorship Gallery: Why you should take more photos and upload them In focus: Questions and answers about the court case Traffic report: Twisted tricks or tempting treats? Technology report: Wikimedia tech, the Asian News International case, and the ultra-rare BLACKLOCK Humour: Man quietly slinks away from talk page argument after realizing his argument dumb, wrong
Single page Front page About Subscribe Suggestions Archives

Hey Finngall i actually haven't read your previous message that you have sent me yesterday, and before reading your message i just undo your action you have done to both the pages. So i request you to please undo my action on both the pages on chaudhary charan singh airport and chaudhary charan singh international airport. I understand your words . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shane Editor (talk • contribs) 06:33, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Shane Editor: Done. Thank you. The proper course would be to request a page move, but I suggest first starting a discussion on the article's talk page where hopefully a consensus can be reached on what the proper title for the article should be. (I have no opinion on the matter--I'm just trying to ensure that proper procedure is followed regardless of the final result). Let me know if you have further questions. Thanks, and happy editing. --Finngall ^talk 07:15, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, Finngall. Why did you rollback article "2022 national electoral calendar"? Is there something wrong or incorrect? --OnionBulb ^{Talk ⁄ Contributions}.- 17:41, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@OnionBulb: As I explained in the edit summary of my reversion, your addition of the Taiwanese local elections to the national electoral calendar was incorrect, as this page is reserved for national-level elections such as presidential elections or elections to national parliaments. Elections at the state, provincial or municipal levels in 2022 should be listed at 2022 local electoral calendar, and in fact the Taiwanese local elections were already listed there. Let me know if you have further questions. Thanks! --Finngall ^talk 20:30, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Finngall,

Thanks for the feedback, the reason you've stated as "Article about a company, corporation or organization, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject" however the links provided are very much credible links in Pharma Domain even few main stream domain like Forbes & BusinessWire covering innovative product launched using rich text messaging. This also resulted them to feature on PharmaVoice 100 list which consist of top 100 influencers in the Pharma Industry. Who are disrupting the Phamra Business with their innovation. Also Forbes featured their cofounder Anupam Nandawana as industry innovators. Their Products are disrupting the Pharma Sales and the article is about that. If you need additional reference please let me know. NiiteshPattiil (talk) 12:34, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@NiiteshPattiil: Notability, in Wikipedia's particular definition of the term, is based on whether the subject of an article has received significant coverage from reliable sources which are independent of the subject. Every reference you provided in the article was either a direct link to the company or a press release originating from the company. In several of these cases, it was the exact same press release regurgitated on to more than one site. There was absolutely zero independent sourcing, and without references to third-party reliable sources, there is literally nothing upon which a proper encyclopedia article can be based. Wikipedia does not care what a company has to say about itself, and anyone can make a top 100 list and claim that it is somehow significant.

I hope that this helps. Let me know if you have more questions. Thank you. --Finngall ^talk 15:17, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Finngall,

Thank you for the detailed answer and now I know exactly what I've to work upon. Thank you for the answer really appreciate your feedback. I'll also keep this in mind for my future articles as I've plenty of topics to write on wikipedia.

-NiiteshPattiil NiiteshPattiil (talk) 11:00, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion was closed as keep FYI. WikiVirusC^(talk) 00:03, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiVirusC: Gah, definite brainfart there, sorry. Still, I wish that people using XFDcloser would take more care to watch for "also nominated" articles that get missed by the script. Anyway, thanks. --Finngall ^talk 16:18, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for addressing the innappropriate AFD tag by this editor. He is also seeking to delete relevant RS-supported information. See here. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mohamed_Hamza&diff=1094669933&oldid=1094535240

This is not the first time.

Can you please keep the page on your watchlist, if that is not too much of a request? Many thanks. --2603:7000:2143:8500:8D47:68E2:128D:C8C3 (talk) 07:19, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for supporting the NPP initiative to improve WMF support of the Page Curation tools. Another way you can help is by voting in the Board of Trustees election. The next Board composition might be giving attention to software development. The election closes on 6 September at 23:59 UTC. View candidate statement videos and Vote Here. MB 03:25, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I have a question for you, because I'm new to this. How come the Eric Delko Wikipedia page was reverted and turned into a redirect when there are plenty of other CSI Miami pages for much more insignificant characters that didn't have as much screen time! Thanks 2001:48F8:1017:82C:9558:FCD1:7C93:A5C7 (talk) 16:58, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. The article on Eric Delko was converted to a redirect to List of CSI: Miami characters per the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric Delko in 2017. My only involvement was to restore the redirect as per that result after the article had been restored without any discussion, or indeed any improvement whatsoever. As for comparisons with the existing articles on other CSI: Miami characters:

• In general terms, the existence of an article on a subject does not in itself justify the existence of another article on a similar or related subject--see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.
• Whether a TV character (as opposed to the actor playing them) merits their own article is a matter of whether that particular character (as opposed to the show in general, or again, as opposed to the actor) has been the subject of out-of-universe coverage from reliable sources which are independent of the subject, which is in line with the notability standards we have for any other subject on Wikipedia. Screen time has nothing to do with it. Looking at the full version of the Delko article, I would agree with the consensus from the earlier discussion that the article did not meet that standard.
• With regard to CSI: Miami characters in particular, I'm not an expert on the show, and I don't delve much into article on TV shows in general, but a quick look at some other articles on these characters gives me the impression that these articles should be converted to redirects as well, as their sourcing is no better than that of the Delko article.

I hope this helps. Please feel free to ask further questions if you have them. Thanks, and happy editing. --Finngall ^talk 19:27, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for the insight, but I'm still a bit confused. I see minor characters that still have Wikipedia pages, but he was one of the main characters. I guess I should try to find who originally nominated that page to be redirected and ask them what their thoughts are. I'm not upset by any means, but I'm just confused because one would think that main characters that have their own page would be more liable to continue having said page, while minor characters would have their pages deleted. 2001:48F8:1017:82C:9558:FCD1:7C93:A5C7 (talk) 00:26, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Help me understand why I cannot nominate it for AFD..? 2601:344:4100:4ED0:79E7:125C:74EB:5464 (talk) 19:45, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can, but nominating an article for deletion per WP:AFD is a multi-step process of which tagging the article itself is merely Step 1. Step 2 is to create the discussion page for the deletion discussion--as an anonymous editor without a registered account, you cannot do this yourself, but you can offer up a policy-based reason for deletion at the article's talk page and request that a registered editor complete the process on your behalf at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion. (I have that page watchlisted and have completed quite a number of IP nominations in this way myself.) Also note that when you tagged the article, it linked to an old discussion from 2006--when an article is renominated, an entirely new discussion page needs to be created ("Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Bryan (2nd nomination)" in this case.). Note that the 2006 discussion was about an entirely different person with the same name, but that is irrelevant for our purposes.

Further details and instructions can be found at WP:AFDHOWTO. If you have more questions, feel free to come back here. Thanks. --Finngall ^talk 21:16, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I am looking for a Wiki specialist to write / edit and publish an article on Sandton, Gauteng, South Africa and Claremont, Cape Town South Africa. DeeJooste (talk) 08:19, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how @SivaGoth is involved with the subject, but they used this as a source in the article, so I'm not sure of the appropriateness of this inclusion as used for biographical information or the updated photo. Thank you for your removal of the war crimes and other nonsense posted to the article however. 207.229.139.154 (talk) 16:50, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Other references were removed, repeatedly, along with the new image without proper explanation. An updated image should not be a controversial issue, but I'm guessing some activst editors have an eye on that page. SivaGoth (talk) 23:08, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There was no reference the first time you added it, and the information was removed by @AstatineEnjoyer. You did an undo and it was removed again with an explanation that the DOB was unsourced, so you reverted again and then added a "reference" to his Facebook page, which I then removed with the explanation that the DOB and other biographical information did not appear on the Facebook page which is probably not a valid reliable source even if the information had been there. If you're going to make an argument you should stick with the facts. 207.229.139.154 (talk) 03:16, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did. If you're going to maliciously and groundlessly revert eduis you should probably be more sure of yourself. The person in question is probably the best source you can offer - realistically - for a living person. I appreciate that Wikipedia seems to be a home for pedants and activists more than archivists, but that seems massively counterproductive. SivaGoth (talk) 09:55, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

dear Sir, Please see References seriously about The State of Birland 1.Refrences in News Papers https://www.facebook.com/Birlandmedia 2.opening Representative Offices and other official things and Meetings.. www.facebook.com/birtawil 3.The Most Important our Relations,Documents and Kings of The nations & Tribes etc.. www.birlandgov.org/relations Please check carefuly Regards. The State of Birland (BirTawil Land) Birtawill (talk) 22:57, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Birtawill: If I had a dollar for every person who has claimed to be establishing a new government of Bir Tawil, I could afford to buy the place myself. Wikipedia requires claims such as this to be supported by independent references to reliable sources, and the links you have provided would not meet this standard even if your claim were valid. --Finngall ^talk 23:29, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Thanks

anyway We officialy opened our Representative office in Nigeria and contact offices in Nepal and have endorsment from Shandong Government Chania and document about Tourism with Nepal

WWe are in progress

It seems you didnnt see the links

and the native people there chosen us ..etc

anyway we will be soon recognized country :)

Regards Birtawill (talk) 23:37, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Finngall. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of American Cosmetic Association, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7: "recognized by the CDC for their diabetes prevention program" is a credible claim of significance. Thank you. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 02:37, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! you've recently reverted my edit for the AfD nomination of the article Ukudar Spor Kulubu, which has a misspelled title as understood from the redirect target. As being a Turkish, the titel has no meaning at all. I wanted to know what led you to revert my edit_ Thanks. CeeGee 05:25, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@CeeGee: As stated in the edit summary of my revert, a redirect is not an article, and therefore a deletion discussion thereon would take place at WP:RFD, not at AfD. --Finngall ^talk 06:06, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that you have reverted my AFD tags to the following article: CODE n. The article has poor sourcing, and hence I flagged it for deletion. The given reason was "Unexplained Deletion." Is it okay that I can flag it again but this time by providing a reason?.‍ Tom Joe James 📝 💬 Wanna talk? | 📝 Contributions 16:11, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tomlovesfar: Two points:

• A proper nomination of an article for AfD is a multi-step process, of which tagging the article is merely the first. Please see the full instructions are at WP:AFDHOWTO. My reversion here was in no way a judgement on the validity of the nomination or of the article, but simply one of procedure. If the nomination is not properly completed soon on Velaro, Inc., I will revert that tag as well.
• Your edit to tag CODE n also included other edits including the removal of an entire section. I haven't looked closely at whether the section should have been there or not, but if the removal was warranted I would had done it with a separate edit with an appropriate edit summary.

Hope this helps. --Finngall ^talk 16:58, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since you reverted my reopening of the Levicar deletion discussion, I just wanted to reach out and ask what the proper process is for renominating an article where a deletion review is unnecessary. I didn't see it addressed in Wikipedia:Renominating for deletion but maybe I just missed something. (Update: I read through the link you put when you reverted my edit on the Levicar page, I just want to check that subst:afdx|2nd is the proper tag to use in this case before I add it). TKOIII (talk) 18:00, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)@TKOIII: As per my edit summary on the reversion of your AfD tagging on the article itself, renominating an article for a second (or subsequent) AfD discussion requires the creation of a new discussion page, i.e. "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Levicar (2nd nomination)". See WP:AFDHOWTO. (Update: Yes, subst:afdx|2nd is correct.) Thanks for reaching out. --Finngall ^talk 18:08, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TKOIII: You left out some important steps. Use of the {{afd2}} tag is essential on the discussion page, as it provides vital links relating to the discussion, including (and especially) one back to the article itself. It also makes the page visible to certain bots which perform useful maintenance tasks. And the discussion then needed to be transcluded to a daily log page to bring it to the attention of those editors who evaluate nominated articles. (Bonus: If the afd2 tag is applied properly, a bot will do this transclusion for you if you forget) I've fixed these things on your behalf, but for future nominations please fully follow the provided steps. Thanks for listening. --Finngall ^talk 18:43, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove disability pretender from nomination from deletion? It is nonsensical. There is not a legality section. It is against the law in the United States. 216.145.66.227 (talk) 22:01, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, if you put the legality section in the article, it would make more sense. Even if it had "This section is empty" for some countries. 216.145.66.227 (talk) 22:01, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. An AfD nomination is a multi-step process, of which tagging the article is simply the first. I therefore removed the tag as an incomplete nomination for procedural reasons--this should in no way be construed as a judgement one way or the other on the article or on your nomination thereof. Please see WP:AFDHOWTO, and note that while unregistered editors such as yourself cannot complete the nomination without assistance, if you provide a valid reason for deletion on the article's talk page and make a request at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion, someone can complete the nomination on your behalf. In fact, I have assisted many anonymous editors with this process myself. Hope this helps, and feel free to ask further questions. Happy editing. --Finngall ^talk 22:17, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I atleast want the legality section inserted. 216.145.66.227 (talk) 22:19, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Finngall, i needed your help. Draft:Jhanak submission was rejected on February 15 2024, and I incorporated the changes and submitted it for review but now it is more than two months the article is not reviewed again, this is a prominent series and the draft is not moving to mainspace at Jhanak due to redirect present there. Can you please guide me what should i do. Thankyou Imsaneikigai (talk) 17:09, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Imsaneikigai: As noted in the "review waiting" template, submitted drafts aren't reviewed in any particular order, so my main advice here would be to continue to be patient--there are no deadlines here. As for the presence of the redirect, if the article is accepted, then the accepting reviewer will see to it that the redirect gets replaced appropriately, so there is no need to worry. Thanks for asking, and happy editing. --Finngall ^talk 20:41, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Finngall: What followup? What are you talking about? I've tried 3 times (count them 3 times) to delete this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ukudoks (talk • contribs) 00:02, June 8, 2024 (UTC)

@Ukudoks: Nominating an article for AfD is a multi-step process, of which tagging the article is merely the first. See WP:AFDHOWTO and fully follow the instructions there. --Finngall ^talk 00:19, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Finngall:Guess forth time's the charm, thanks for the help Ukudoks (talk) 13:46, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Finngall. Sorry for disturbing you. Actually I needed to ask what to do if someone overwrites your page just because he/she requested on talk page of the administrator. Actually I had created Mishri but the editor/creator of the duplicate page requested and got my deleted instead of his and moved his at the Mishri space eventhough he was wrong. Is there any way I can get back my article. It was better sourced and had production section as well. Imsaneikigai (talk) 10:30, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Imsaneikigai: The proper place to discuss the state of the article is on the article’s talk page. If consensus cannot be found there, then there are other means of resolving disagreements, but the talk page is the first venue for discussion. --Finngall ^talk 16:01, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the procedural close ... I was multitasking (reviewing some of the related mayoral election articles that got to mainspace) and for some reason didn't notice this was still in draftspace. Thank you for being more attentive than me! Chetsford (talk) 01:02, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]