User talk:BusterD

  1. Home
  2. Wiki
With thanks to User:RexxS: Wikipedia:Colons and asterisks. Please read and edit accordingly.
RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

No RfXs since 14:16, 11 July 2025 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online


AfC submissions
Random submission
~8 weeks
2,842 pending submissions
(refresh)
Archive Archives
22 Jul 05 – 26 Sep 06
09 Oct 06 – 05 Dec 06
14 Dec 06 – 07 Nov 07
01 Dec 07 – 12 Feb 08
15 Feb 08 – 08 May 08
19 May 08 – 13 Nov 08
26 Nov 08 – 07 Sep 09
08 Sep 09 – 29 Oct 10
29 Oct 10 – 26 Sep 11
04 Oct 11 – 30 Sep 12
01 Oct 12 – 13 Oct 13
26 Oct 13 – 27 Aug 14
09 Sep 14 – 24 Dec 15
25 Dec 15 – 08 Apr 18
21 Apr 18 – 30 Jun 19
07 Jul 19 – 26 Apr 21
03 May 21 – 05 Apr 22
07 Apr 22 – 26 Dec 22
01 Jan 23 – 01 Jan 24
01 Jan 24 – 31 Dec 24
01 Jan 25 - 26 Jun 25
.

Precious anniversary

[edit]
Precious
Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:37, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2025

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2025).

Administrator changes

removed NuclearWarfare

Interface administrator changes

added L235

Guideline and policy news

Miscellaneous

  • The 2025 Developing Countries WikiContest will run from 1 July to 30 September. Sign up now!
  • Administrator elections will take place this month. Administrator elections are an alternative to RFA that is a gentler process for candidates due to secret voting and multiple people running together. The call for candidates is July 9–15, the discussion phase is July 18–22, and the voting phase is July 23–29. Get ready to submit your candidacy, or (with their consent) to nominate a talented candidate!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:48, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

copyvio question

[edit]

Hi there. Thanks for all you do on the project. I know you do some work on copyvios and here's a question: while US Government websites are pretty much free to copy, not all US states have the same freedom. Is there somewhere to check this? The reason I ask is there have been some new articles created which simply copy the text of the Georgia state constitution (ex: Article Four of the Constitution of Georgia (U.S. State)). Thoughts? Onel5969 TT me 16:13, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

[edit]

CSD U5 nominations

[edit]

Hey @BusterD:, it's me, the guy who nominated all of those pages as U5.

I've just seen your ANI thread, but I wanted to respond on your talk page as it will be less visible, because I'm not sure how much of this I can say as I have contacted Oversight about some of it last night, and they did take some action (absolutely revdel this message if you see fit). With that said, I was able to figure out that all of the pages were being created as part of a classroom exercise on, as you'd guess, the safe and responsible use of technology. I am concerned about the fact that this is happening, and hope someone with a bit more reach than little ole 1800 edits me would be able to try and contact someone else to see if something can be done about it, but its unlikely. Weirdguyz (talk) 13:00, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tags and I'm sure we're not done with it yet. Let's keep this thread where other helpers can see it. You should say something at the ANI if you haven't already. Thanks for the many tags! BusterD (talk) 13:02, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

G6 deletion of Frederick Smith (disambiguation)

[edit]

So why did you delete this page? I thought it was useful, as it is linked to by a couple of pages and it is also linked to by a guideline page This (I'm assuming) a redirect is necessary per WP:INTDAB. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 22:13, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's an unnecessary disambiguation page as tagged. Looking at the policy, I see that I've misunderstood the intention, which specifically recommends this sort of unnecessary disambiguation (as with the given example Mercury (disambiguation)). I'll restore it and thank you for correcting me. BusterD (talk) 22:52, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that what happened was @3602kiva used an automated tool to "fix" this disambiguation link on this redirect, resulting in the redirect redirecting to itself. An IP later tagged this page for g6 speedy deletion. I've fixed redirect now. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 22:59, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your explanation makes more sense than mine. I knew I saw a reason to accept the tag; I appreciate your helping me see something to look out for in the future. BusterD (talk) 23:20, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, that's exactly what I did. I apologize for that, @Justjourney!
Yeah, the policy is to have all the intentional links to disambiguation pages go to a page that explicitly says (disambiguation). I most likely was changing a lot in a short period of time and in my haste inadvertently redirected the page to itself.
3602kiva (talk) 04:30, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request to retrieve my article for revision

[edit]

Hi @BusterD, thanks for taking a look at Draft:Michael Mezz and informing me of the need to rewrite the article to be suitable for Wikipedia. After having reviewed the guidelines, I understand your nomination and would like to request for an opportunity to retrieve my article to revise it and resubmit for review. Thank you! Leed66 (talk) 22:50, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First, my actions at Draft:Michael Mezz were purely administrative. Another editor tagged the draft as promotional. I agreed and deleted on behalf of the community. This was not a close call; this is something I do 20-30 times a day, and I'm just one admin out of a thousand. FTR, Wikipedia is not social media, is not Linkedin, is not a place for CV; it is an encyclopedia. Wikipedians write about notable topics, subjects which you and I would expect to be found in a printed encyclopedia, not a directory of services. Based on provided sourcing, I see nothing in the original draft which would put the subject past any bar for WP:Notability, WP:Verify, or WP:ANYBIO. All of the sources I see have the subject talking about themself or another subject. I don't see a single reliable source provided or found in a reasonable WP:BEFORE which directly details the subject itself. As a result, the article appears created entirely on your knowledge of the subject, not on found sources. This is not a satisfactory situation. I will grudgingly restore your draft, but I believe in its present condition the draft is likely to be again tagged as promotional and again deleted by another admin. I strongly suggest you blank the restored draft and start by finding multiple reliable secondary sources independent of the subject which directly detail their life and achievements. Autobiography is strongly discouraged (and any conflict of interest must be declared). BusterD (talk) 23:38, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Look at this category which is constantly refreshed with new speedy deletion tags: Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as spam. Look at examples not yet deleted to see why I'm not encouraging you. No offense; you're likely very good at what you do and I hope you understand I'm not your opponent. I am a trusted custodian, however. BusterD (talk) 23:54, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Query about page protection

[edit]

Why have you applied extended-confirmed page protection to Gender-critical feminism? Sweet6970 (talk) 12:28, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In the moment, I was responding to a request for page protection as an Arbitration remedy. Looking at the page, I could see the only disruptors in recent history all shared autoconfirmed status; I could see the page had been semi-protected two years ago. So EC was the mildest upgrade I could make. The only option I had was duration, and I chose indef, given the frequent disruption on a designated sensitive subject. This does not prevent any editor from applying for changes on the talk page. I'd be interested in how you think this might have been handled differently. BusterD (talk) 16:34, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your response. I’m a regular editor at this article, though I was not following it for a few days at the time of the request and the application of the protection. I don’t actually see any disruption at all – just a few reverts. No edit-warring, no vandalism. And the effect of the protection is to exclude a certain number of editors who have valid disagreements with the reverters (by which I mean, I agree with the non-EC editors). So I ask you to remove the protection, because I can’t see any justification for it. Sweet6970 (talk) 16:48, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The same answer you received from @ToBeFree also applies here. The page has experienced several recent disruptions, including various deletions of content by recently discovered Sockpuppet Molikog/Golikom that had to be reverted, all of which would have been prevented by ECP in this contentious topic. Hence the appropriate enforcement of ECP now to prevent potentially new Sockpuppet an appearing in this GENSEX contentious topic. Raladic (talk) 20:31, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ECP says Extended confirmed protection should not be used as a preemptive measure against disruption that has not yet occurred, nor should it be used to privilege extended confirmed users over unregistered/new users in valid content disputes (except as general sanction enforcement; Sweet6970 (talk) 20:37, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Did you see the sentence preceding the one you copied? - Where semi-protection has proven to be ineffective, administrators may use extended confirmed protection to combat disruption (vandalism, abusive sockpuppetry, edit wars, etc.) on any topic. We discovered a sock, they had disrupted the page, reversions were made and the existing semi-protection has proven to be ineffective, so it was raised to ECP to combat further disruption. Also Wikipedia:Protection policy#Contentious topics can be protected at any level if necessary to protect them from further disruption. Raladic (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The disruption you're referring to is my removal of a highly contentious sentence that was added to the article two days before the blocked sock removed it. It was not stable content. PositivelyUncertain (talk) 21:19, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For my part, I'm going to decline the request to reduce the protection level on Gender-critical feminism. Further detailed discussion of this topic on my talk is unnecessary. BusterD (talk) 21:26, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 July 2025

[edit]
Endowment tax form, Wikimania, elections, U4C, fundraising and a duck!
And how do we know?
Five-year journey comes to healthy fruition.
Wikimedians from around the world will gather in person and online at the twentieth annual meeting of Wikimania.
As well as "hermeneutic excursions" and other scientific research findings.
The report covers the Foundation's operations from July 2023 - June 2024
A step towards objective and comprehensive coverage of a project nearly too big to follow.
Drawn this century!
How data from the Wikipedia "necessary articles" lists can shed new light on the gender gap
Annual plans, external trends, infrastructure, equity, safety, and effectiveness. What does it all mean?
Rest in peace.
Wouldn't it be nice without billionaires, scandals, deaths, and wars?
If you are too blasé for Mr. Blasé and don't give a FAC.
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:48, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Trajko Boškoski

[edit]

Hello! You closed the MfD discussion for Draft:Trajko Boškoski (here) about 2 weeks ago, but the template is still on the draft and it is listed under Category:Miscellaneous pages for deletion. I was planning on accepting the draft to mainspace, but the deletion template makes it awkward to do so. Please advise what I should do. Thanks -- Reconrabbit 13:30, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake. I've added {{old mfd}} as I should have done then. (getting spoiled using the XfD closing script on regular pagespace) Sorry. please verify I've solved this and report back please if I haven't. BusterD (talk) 13:48, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your Admin Election question on IAR

[edit]

I appreciate you asking that question of candidates -- it's a good one and it has gotten me thinking about whether or not IAR is functionally "dead-letter law" these days, and whether or not that is a bad thing. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 16:59, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IAR certainly doesn't mean the same thing it meant even in 2020. IAR was essential back in the day, and the proposition still has great validity as a principle. BusterD (talk) 00:48, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

[edit]
Technically not until 19:05. Still not old enough to buy a drink in Wikipedia years... BusterD (talk) 00:30, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Thevikastanwar

[edit]

Could you add something to his talk page to let him know why the user page was deleted? I'm sure there is a template for it but i forgot where it is Trade (talk) 13:01, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thy boon hath been granted

[edit]

Welp, back in December you asked me to help out with the draft Perth Panthers, and it's taken me seven months, but I finally did publish it to mainspace. It turns out it was just about all AI generated , so I pretty much had to cut everything and rewrite it myself, but at least it has an article now! BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:02, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Always a pleasure to hear from you, dude. Thanks for honoring your willingness. I spend a bunch of time these days using AI detectors, but I suspect I was more naive about the prevalence of such insertion way back in the day. BusterD (talk) 01:06, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Appealing an article nominated for deletion

[edit]

Hello, I am an editor in the Arabic Wikipedia. I create articles in the English Wikipedia and sometimes translate articles from the Arabic Wikipedia. This article Al-Shaaer TV was nominated for deletion by someone and then removed by an anonymous ip, The article is written with complete neutrality about a satellite channel that is famous among the Shiite Islamic sect and covers their occasions and events and has controversial television programm, I did not take anything in return, not even money. I wrote it on my own. -- Sayyid Al-Musawi Call Me 📞 08:07, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how you think I can help you. If I were in your situation I would be making these comments on the talk page or on the talk page of whoever applied that tag or comment in page history. BusterD (talk) 13:04, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@BusterD I I thought that the administrator is the only one who can review the article and remove the deletion template. -- Sayyid Al-Musawi Call Me 📞 14:43, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Admin's Barnstar
Thank you for your efforts as a Wikimedia admin. I truly appreciate your work:) Baqi:) (talk) 22:09, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Portal design

[edit]

I know you've been active with portals in the past, so I was wondering if you had any thoughts on User:Thebiguglyalien/Portal sample and User:Thebiguglyalien/Portal sample 2. I see these replacing the mostly-dead portal system with a series of bot-updated pages that use this layout or something similar to it. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 02:00, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 231, July 2025

[edit]
Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:47, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Question about my username

[edit]

Hi @BusterD:,

I hope you're doing well. I wanted to check if my username EasyChat is okay to use on this platform. I'm aiming to follow all the rules and avoid any confusion or conflict with existing names or guidelines.

Please let me know if my username is acceptable, or if I should consider changing it.

Thanks so much!

EasyChat (talk) 07:15, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A7 Deletion: Abdel Razak Yakubu

[edit]

Hello @BusterD

I hope you're well. I'm reaching out regarding the recent deletion of the article Abdel Razak Yakubu, which was tagged and deleted under WP:A7.

I understand that speedy deletions are often made under time constraints, but I wanted to kindly seek clarification on the rationale behind this specific deletion. I genuinely believed the subject had some significance in the Ghanaian public sphere and I indicated reliable sources in the article. I initially refrained from contesting the speedy deletion in order to allow space for community input when it was tagged. I’m reaching out to better understand your interpretation of A7 in this case since you are the deleting admin, and whether there might have been any considerations I overlooked. I’d be grateful for your insights as I am struggling to understand this action.

Thank you for your time and your work.

Best regards,-- Robertjamal12 ~🔔 14:51, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2025

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2025).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, a new speedy deletion criterion, G15, has been enacted. It applies to pages generated by a large language model (LLM) without human review.
  • Following a request for comment, there is a new policy outlining the granting of permissions to view the IP addresses of temporary accounts. Temporary account deployment on the English Wikipedia is currently scheduled for September 2025, and editors can request access to the permission ahead of time. Admins are encouraged to keep an eye on the request page; there will likely be a flood of editors requesting the permission when they realize they can no longer see IP addresses.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Wikimania 2025 is happening in Nairobi, Kenya, and online from August 6 to August 9. This year marks 20 years of Wikimania. Interested users can join the online event. Registration for the virtual event is free and will remain open throughout Wikimania. You can register here now.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:55, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 August 2025

[edit]
Plus a mysterious CheckUser incident, and the news with Wikinews.
A review of June, July and August.
Who is this guy?
Threads since June.
And slop.
It's not a conlang, it's a crossword puzzle.
gang aft agley, an' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain, for promis'd joy!
Everybody's Somebody's Fool.
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:22, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BRGHT

[edit]

Hello Buster, if you do have time, you could take a look at the SPI to examine the behavioral analysis I put forward, as a check cannot be performed; data would likely be stale as mentioned by the clerk. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:53, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Buster, don't worry and sorry for the bother, another admin handled it already. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:28, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Abdel Razak Yakubu

[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Abdel Razak Yakubu. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Robertjamal12 ~🔔 09:30, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ikechukwu Arthur Anoke

[edit]

Hi BusterD - looks like this article was recreated after an AfD consensus earlier this year landed on "delete". Since I can't see the deleted revisions and it's not in the Internet Archive, can you check to see if it qualifies for CSD G4? Thanks! Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:51, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Another request if it's not too much trouble - is the version of Kunal Singh Rathore before its deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kunal Singh Rathore substantially different from the version live today? Thanks! Dclemens1971 (talk) 05:37, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've deleted Ikechukwu Arthur Anoke as clear G4 (the page possessed more sourcing BEFORE discussion concluded delete). On the other hand, Kunal Singh Rathore is significantly better sourced than the previous iteration. I'll choose not to weigh in about notability on the merits. Thanks, as always, for your sharp eyes. BusterD (talk) 06:33, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for checking! Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:07, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieval of Draft:Uni Enrol

[edit]

Hi Buster, I've noted that the Draft:Uni Enrol was deleted due to Wikipedia:CSD#G11. I understand that it needs to go through a revamp in order to remove promotional language so I'll definitely be making changes to it. I was going to create the draft again but since there was a notice of the draft being previously deleted, I was wondering if it would be best practice to create a new one or to retrieve the old one for amendment?

Thanks!

Randomplayuser (talk) 03:46, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I thank you for your polite request. In my opinion, you should start afresh. I should first point out that two separate reviewers determined the page was entirely promotional in tone. The second reviewer saw that even after feedback and your redaction, you still weren't seeing the problem. It was at that point they decided to apply the speedy deletion tag as you've described. My actions were purely administrative; I agreed with the previous assessments, saw the tag as appropriate, and then deleted under G11. If I were to simply restore the old page, it's likely a third reviewer would come to the same conclusion the draft was promotional, and tag it again (and it would be again deleted). Each such a draft deletion leaves a sort of stain on the page and the page creator; wikipedians may learn not to trust your good faith. Based on the information and sources applied, I have doubts Uni Enrol is sufficiently notable to sustain an article. If I was interested in creating such an article, I might find three or four independent sources with the highest degree of direct detailing. From those sources I might create a tiny stub in which every single assertion could be verified and cited. I might wait for a reviewer to look at the draft and NOT tag it for deletion. Then I might consult THAT reviewer with a brief list of additional sources to see what else I could cite. Please read this essay. Thanks again for asking. Good luck. BusterD (talk) 11:40, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Thank you for your pointers, this actually was great help for me to understand notability. I'll put off any rewrites/article requests until I can determine if there are more detailed independent sources about Uni Enrol. Thank you again for the speedy feedback!
Randomplayuser (talk) 07:39, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request for recreating User:Dinesh Raiswal page

[edit]

नमस्ते,

मैंने हाल ही में "User:Dinesh Raiswal" नाम का अपना यूज़र पेज बनाया था, लेकिन यह U5 और G11 के अंतर्गत डिलीट हो गया। मुझे अब Wikipedia के नियम और पॉलिसी समझ में आ गए हैं कि यूज़र पेज केवल Wikipedia में किए गए कार्यों, रुचियों और योगदानों के बारे में होना चाहिए, न कि किसी भी प्रकार के व्यक्तिगत प्रचार या विज्ञापन के लिए।

मैं यह आश्वासन देता हूँ कि अगर मुझे अपना पेज दोबारा बनाने का अवसर दिया गया, तो उसमें केवल Wikipedia-संबंधित जानकारी ही होगी, और कोई भी प्रोमोशनल या बाहरी लिंक नहीं होंगे।

कृपया मेरा पेज पुनः बनाने की अनुमति दें।

धन्यवाद।

---

Hello,

I recently created my user page "User:Dinesh Raiswal," but it was deleted under U5 and G11. I now fully understand Wikipedia's policies that a user page should only contain information related to my work, interests, and contributions on Wikipedia, and not any personal promotion or advertising.

I assure you that if I am given the opportunity to recreate my page, it will only include Wikipedia-related information and will not contain any promotional content or external links.

Kindly allow me to recreate my user page.

Thank you.

Dinesh Raiswal (talk) 06:47, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your request. Given the entirely promotional nature of the page, I'm going to decline the request to undelete, but will point out there's no barrier to you creating a new user page. Keep in mind that I (and others) will be watching. Please use restraint. If you attempt to recreate a similarly self-promoting user page, I (or somebody else) will likely delete it again. Wikipedians are here to work on pagespace, not argue with new contributors. If you make more work for your fellow wikipedians, we will deal with it as disruption. For best results, please keep all your comments and contributions here in the English language. BusterD (talk) 11:06, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Allowing userspace draft to go through AfC

[edit]

Hi BusterD, and thanks for your work.

I’m requesting undeletion of this draft for Draft:Reedsy that you speedily deleted as promotional (G11). I’m asking for the chance to have the draft reviewed through Articles for Creation.

  • The page was marked for deletion while in userspace in my sandbox.
  • It became a Draft when I submitted it to AfC for review.
  • The text was written to be neutral and non-promotional, and I'm of course happy to revise any sentences anyone flags.
  • It contained 14 independent, reliable sources with significant coverage for WP:GNG.
  • The AfC submission template was already present so a reviewer could determine notability.
  • I clearly disclosed my company connection on my user page in line with WP:COI and WP:PAID. (That disclosure itself was removed as promotional, which seems to make complying with WP:DISCLOSE very hard).

I understand and support the need to remove blatant advertising. In this case, given the circumstances, I respectfully request restoration. — PapyrusPoet (talk) 17:13, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Request: restore "Ricardo Santos Silva" to Draft

[edit]

Hi BusterD — could you please restore “Ricardo Santos Silva” to Draft:Ricardo Santos Silva for improvement?

This was written from scratch and isn’t a repost. It adds independent sourcing across several topics/years, including: • Bank of Portugal (29 Dec 2015 senior-bond retransfer) • Reuters + Wall Street Journal (2017 Novo Banco offer/legal steps) • Bank of Uganda + Reuters + The EastAfrican + Daily Monitor (Crane Bank final stage and terms) • Expresso; Visão/Lusa (Moncorvo concession 2019; restart 2020) • Reuters (2022 Chelsea bid >£2bn and £50m facility)

If mainspace isn’t appropriate, draftifying to **Draft:Ricardo Santos Silva** for AfC review would be appreciated.

Thanks! Natacha2001 (talk) 10:20, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to decline your request. This subject has been deleted four times on English Wikipedia. It was deleted per WP:A7 in 2016, deleted by a heavily socked AFD process in 2022, and again at AfD in 2023. The source analysis performed by a wikipedian in that latter process might help you understand the hurdle you face. Not one of the sources or assertions in the new version you created are better or newer, so IMHO the community has already ruled on this subject and this sourcing. I see bare mentions and a few quotations of the subject, nothing better. The subject is a WP:BLP and as such requires multiple independent and reliable sources which directly detail the subject. Nothing you applied meets that criteria. There's nothing in-depth online and I searched the web myself this morning. You are welcome to create a new draft, but given the history, I think it unlikely to pass WP:AFC. Wikipedia is not merely a listing of the rich and powerful. I see the subject has an article on the Portuguese Wikipedia, but they have a different sourcing standard than we do here. If I were in your position, I would focus my attention on the company Aethel Partners, which is more likely to possess direct detailing in reliable sources and less likely to be deleted. Good luck! BusterD (talk) 12:28, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Are you being compensated for working on behalf of this subject? If so by WP:COI policy you are required to disclose your involvement with the client. BusterD (talk) 12:33, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your feedback, BusterD. Understood regarding the history of deletions and the high bar for WP:BLP sourcing. I am not being compensated for this work and have no COI. If I come across stronger, more in-depth independent coverage in the future, I will consider drafting a new version in Draft space for AfC review, rather than mainspace.
Appreciate the guidance and will keep your suggestion in mind about focusing on Aethel Partners as a potentially better-sourced topic. Natacha2001 (talk) 10:25, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

[edit]

@BusterD, thank you for accepting my csd request at Chitti Babu.K. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 18:21, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your accurate tag. I can't be everywhere. Nice to know you've got eyes on the pedia where I might not be looking... BusterD (talk) 18:23, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request to Restore Draft:Myths by the Shore

[edit]

Hi BusterD, can you restore my page Draft:Myths by the Shore in order for it to be contiunely edited, not by me, but by other people. I do agree that it does sound like self-promo, but I try to keep it neutral and use actual resources. Crystalsinthysky (talk) 13:53, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that I oppose restoring this draft due to WP:MADEUP, Wikipedia is not for hosting material created by you and some friends. I also feel WP:NOTWEBHOST is relevant, we should not be hosting personal material that has no realistic chance of ever being notable. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 14:00, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The draft is completely unsourced and is highly promotional. I agree with User:Spiderone and will not restore anything by User:Crystalsinthysky, whose talk page is littered with warnings about submitting unsourced material. BusterD (talk) 14:26, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thank you. I normally cannot add sources due to the fact that I normally edit on my school chromebook, but I will try to add more sources on the pages I can still edit. I'm also still learning how to add sources on to wikipedia and I have multiple sources of the show beinging noted on some socials. Crystalsinthysky (talk) 14:40, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Crystalsinthysky: Unfortunately, to establish that a topic is notable for Wikipedia's purposes, it requires significant coverage of the topic in what we call "secondary, independent, reliable sources" – which basically means reputable journalism and scholarship. Unless Myths by the Shore has been talked about in more than one reputable newspaper, book, magazine, or scholarly article, it's probably not going to clear Wikipedia's bar for inclusion. I'm sorry, I know that's probably not the message you were hoping for! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 14:57, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Got it! I'm going to go ahead and try remaking the article in a couple of months after we release the pilot and it gains some more attenion. Thank you for telling me a more clear reason for why it was removed. Crystalsinthysky (talk) 16:00, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Best of luck!! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 17:15, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Crystalsinthysky (talk) 17:21, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion of Connie Boucher

[edit]

Hi @BusterD, recently I discovered this topic in the Women in Red initiative and I started this article. I found some sources to add but before I could add the sources, someone added the speedy deletion tag and it is gone. If you can kindly restore the article I want to expand it with reliable sources.

Thank you in advance. Zuck28 (talk) 15:14, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol September 2025 Backlog drive

[edit]
September 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
  • On 1 September 2025, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each review will earn 1 point.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:31, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 232, August 2025

[edit]
Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 10:55, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vanshika Parmar

[edit]

I see you deleted the page Vanshika Parmar under G11 over someone who tagged the page (Which seems like an edit war) with an IP address and you deleted it under advertisement despite of her winning Miss Earth 2022 (She is there in the list) how is this promotional can you explain, please?

there are many sources available other than major ones like from the government of Himachal pradesh official website like this [1] coming from the office of Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu as she is from Himachal. There are many sources available too like this [2] The article was non promotional with NPOV too. Suryabeej   ⋠talk⋡ 14:22, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored this on request. I should have looked more fully at the deletion process. As a soft deletion, this was properly restored by another admin. BusterD (talk) 15:58, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, am not a bot!

[edit]

Hello, you seem to think I am a bit but I am a human. Just dropping you a message to say that's not the case. Ansible52 (talk) 19:13, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I drew no such conclusion. I only alleged that your account used an LLM to create a post; this is demonstrably true. I hold to my assertion. BusterD (talk) 19:18, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Restore deleted page

[edit]

Hi BusterD, you recently deleted my page suggesting G11. Can I kindly ask you to restore the page to my sandbox draft page so I can perform comprehensive changes to the page? Tilly.n8 (talk) 06:28, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to decline your request. Draft:Alexander Paz was tagged for WP:G11 by another admin, User:Randykitty. When I reviewed the draft, I confirmed it met G11 criteria, so I deleted the page. In addition, I see you've created a sandbox which holds another (almost identical in form) WP:BLP promotional draft. Both these worthy scientists, Alexander Paz and Douglas Baker, may well have acquired sufficient sources to back a biography, but you haven't identified ANY OF THEM. In the case of Baker, you've offered submitted personal profiles from clearly connected institutions (IEEE, QUT), and then almost identical profiles from other connected orgs (Sustainable Transport Systems Laboratory, Research Data Australia, Future Food Systems, For Food's Sake) which draw on the institutional submissions (what the subject says about himself). Then you've listed virtually every academic article the subject has published. None of these applied sources qualify as diverse reliable and independent sources which directly detail the subject. So you've created a hagiography, entirely positive on the subject, based solely on information the subject has provided. But you've given no sourced information which demonstrates why (of the thousands of PhD in Australia), he should have an encyclopedia article about them. Wikipedia is not LinkedIn. Are you connected to these subjects in some way? These are both rather obscure subjects and I'm dubious a brand new wikipedian like yourself is capable of covering these subjects in a neutral manner. BusterD (talk) 11:07, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for your reply. I see that I've been too unprofessional with my first draft. Yet it would be great to keep the draft in my personal space since some work went into it. I will not publish it again in any form like this and continue to gather more diverse reliable and independent sources for this page. I did not intend to write a hagiography and aim to write the article in a neutral form. I am aware the Wikipedia is not LinkedIn and value the neutral and fact-based information provision. I will continue to improve my skills through editing as well. I know you are busy, yet if it's possible to restore the page to my sandbox or receive the draft via mail, I'd appreciate that. Best, Tilly.n8 (talk) 04:24, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Namak Haraam

[edit]

I hope you are aware of this, where you have been pinged. If you will decline the request, fine, but the subject is being restarted here and we need sources/major statements from the older film article. Kailash29792 (talk) 00:30, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure what happened but agree the article should be restored. The last version on Internet Archive on August 21st https://web.archive.org/web/20250821002925/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namak_Haraam shows the article is about a 1973 Indian film created some time ago and edited by several editors. The AfD linked to in the deletion log points to WP:Articles for deletion/Namak Haram is a different title (Namak Haram rather than Namak Haraam) and about a Pakistani TV series. S0091 (talk) 15:04, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've restored this, since it's clear these are two separate subjects with similar names. The 1973 TV series has seen continuous Wikipedia coverage since 2006. I apologize for my errors. BusterD (talk) 16:36, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Mistakes happen and this one was confusing because of the similar titles on top of title gaming in the topic area by socks, though that was not the issue in this particular circumstance. S0091 (talk) 17:07, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TBPN

[edit]

Hi. I saw that you speedily deleted a draft version of TBPN earlier today. This very similar looking article under the same name was very recently published in mainspace; I have also nominated it for speedy deletion under the same criteria because three of the references, allegedly retrieved today, 404ed. I don't know whether you want to delete this one too, or whether it is better to go to AfD. On the one hand, I don't want to waste editor's time on LLM generated articles; on the other, maybe a full discussion at AfD would be preferable to get consensus on notability one way or the other. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 17:15, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @BusterD and @SunloungerFrog. Just wanted to quickly contest the G15 speedy deletion. While I did use ChatGPT to check spelling and grammar, the article itself was carefully written and reviewed by me. All sources have been verified, and the current citations now point to live, reliable, independent coverage from Business Insider, The Information, Bloomberg Businessweek, and The Washington Post. HotPotato26 (talk) 17:34, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open!

[edit]

Nominations for the upcoming Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Generativity (technology)

[edit]

Hi, I recently attempted to split the page Generativity into two parts, creating the new page Generativity (technology). The motivation here was to resolve a conflation of two unrelated meanings of the term: the psychological meaning and a meaning from the sociology of technology. The issue had been mentioned by several people on Talk:Generativity. The only content I added to Generativity (technology) was the various relevant sections deleted from Generativity.

I created the new page and made these edits manually and in good faith, yet you and another Wikipedian have alleged that an LLM was involved. Well, the text in question is too old to have been created by any LLM (it was added to Generativity in 2011, 2017, etc).

Zittrain's use of the term "generativity" in a technological context may not be noteworthy, but you seem to have deleted the new page for erroneous reasons. --Theoh (talk) 15:50, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Significa liberdade (the tagger), you have something to add? Theoh makes a valid point. BusterD (talk) 16:07, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This makes sense to me. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 17:16, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Significa liberdade! Sorry, Theoh. Appreciate your eyes on the subject. If I didn't goof up this morning, it must still be nighttime... BusterD (talk) 18:38, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have added some invisible comments to the article to indicate some concerns about the sources. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 20:17, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mackenzie Shirilla

[edit]

Excuse me, why did you delete Mackenzie Shirilla? There were about 22 reliable sources discussing this topic and it clearly passed WP:N. This must be some kind of mistake. G13 vs G14 (talk) 14:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Host Students (deleted article) – request for feedback

[edit]

Hi BusterD,

I’m the creator of Host Students, which you recently deleted under A7/G11. I believe the subject may meet WP:ORG notability, as it has received independent coverage in The Irish Times (re: a £1bn joint venture), CoStar, IPE Real Assets, and other reliable sources.

Could you let me know what you feel would need to be improved or added for the article to meet Wikipedia’s standards for inclusion? I’d like to better understand what would make it suitable for mainspace.

Thanks very much for your time and guidance.

~~~~ Lizardogap (talk) 15:07, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This goat...

[edit]

...thanks you.

Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 17:54, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Foolproof Brewing Company?

[edit]

Pretty straightforward start-class brewery article. Speedy, really? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:01, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops! BusterD (talk) 18:03, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
For working hard with speedy deletion tags! –DMartin 21:38, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Pandemic of 2020

[edit]

I saw that you deleted this redirect under R3. I think this is a very plausible search. The 2020 article says that the year was "heavily defined by the COVID-19 pandemic". Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 02:43, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just weighing in here that I tend to agree with having the redirect. I think an RFD nomination would at least be a better determiner than speedy deletion. BD2412 T 02:51, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

About deleted page Ledja Liku

[edit]

Hi, i saw that you deleted page Ledja Liku in my opinion it was sourced and at least i think not like before versions identically (even i dont know how previous versions were). Lanceloth345 (talk) 08:29, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My actions were purely administrative in this deletion. The G4 tagging by another editor was valid and the recent previous discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ledja Liku unanimously decided to delete. I'm unwilling to restore this title myself. You are welcome to take this matter to Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion or you may create a new draft using the WP:Articles for creation process. BusterD (talk) 09:05, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply, i appreciate. Lanceloth345 (talk) 09:07, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Saudi Green and Middle East Green initiatives

[edit]

Hello, regarding the notability of an article you've deleted, (Saudi Green and Middle East Green initiatives). The article is about a well recognized regional environmental initiative, it's an official initiative and the article in Arabic is here. Could you please move it to draft so I can add more English resources to the content to prove the notability?Ravan (talk) 20:52, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let's ask the admin who tagged the article, User:The Anome. Perhaps they can tell us what motivated them to tag Saudi Green and Middle East Green Initiatives as A7 on August 24th, an assessment with which I agreed and upon which I deleted. By the way, there's another at Draft:Saudi Green and Middle East Green initiatives, which a completely different user moved from pagespace as not ready for publication. Required sourcing for organizations is quite a bit more stringent on en.wiki than elsewhere. BusterD (talk) 21:46, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ravan: The draft seems to be coming along nicely, but it needs more sourcing from WP:RS to ensure notability. Note that WP:RS need not be in English. — The Anome (talk) 10:18, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2025

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2025).

Administrator changes

readded Euryalus
removed

Interface administrator changes

readded Ragesoss

CheckUser changes

readded AmandaNP
removed SQL

Oversight changes

readded AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open on whether use of emojis with no encyclopedic value in mainspace and draftspace (e.g., at the start of paragraphs or in place of bullet points) should be added as a criterion under G15.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • The arbitration case Article titles and capitalisation 2 has been closed.
  • An RfC is in progress to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:15, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article restoration request: EconomyBookings

[edit]

Hi BusterD,

I was just trying to compare the previous version of the article, but I was unable to locate it. This is the first article I have published on Wikipedia (it was translated from another language version). I would like to mention that I am willing to improve the article; therefore, I kindly ask if you could provide me with the draft of the article in my personal workspace. Thank you very much for your assistance, and I would greatly appreciate any advice. Monicatgsa (talk) 10:18, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do not choose to help you. This page was previously deleted at AfD. The draft I deleted today was clearly written by an LLM, and constituted an advertisement for the website. If we let every single small business create their own Wikipedia page, then nobody will regard us as an encyclopedia. See WP:NOT. BusterD (talk) 10:24, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) @Monicatgsa: Indeed. We would be LinkedIn. For guidance, User:Deepfriedokra/g11 and the information linked therein might be helpful in crafting a non promotional draft with your own hands. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:27, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Deepfriedokra I am grateful for these explanations, I have analyzed them carefully. I have decided to focus on other articles and once I have more experience, I will deal with this article. Thank you, and may I return to your discussion page for any further questions? Monicatgsa (talk) 15:43, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 September 2025

[edit]
UK Online Safety Act remains undefeated.
Plus Wiki rules, Wiki Spin, and physicists get street cred!
The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance.
And other new research findings.
Tis true: there's magic in the web of it.
With the usual mix of war, death, super heroes, a belt, and Wednesday.
It's an easy one.
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:03, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SS Setubal

[edit]

I can't see this page you just deleted but I suspect it was not a disambig page but a set index and should therefore be retained Lyndaship (talk) 18:02, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the headsup. I can see that now in the history and I missed it. I have restored the page fully; I will allow you and others to navigate precisely what version of the content is appropriate. BusterD (talk) 20:17, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tagging our friend User:KylieTastic who created the most recent version. BusterD (talk) 20:36, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Took me a moment to realise you had deleted it after my revert, then undeleted. I did not agree with the G14 tag, but I've somehow got through more than a decade without coming across WP:SETINDEX. The examples given are types of list articles but still articles, it's hard to see how this very minimal disambiguation page is a list article which complies with stand-alone list for which notability is still a requirement. The other ship from 1890–93 had no reference to show it is notable. Per WP:SETINDEX it did meet both "Similar names" and "Similar subjects" so "could be a set index article" but I think the could is still important, and I think the key statement is "A disambiguation page should not be reclassified as a SIA on the basis that its entries all happen to be instances of a single type, unless the page has metadata or extra information about its entries". If this was generally valid a lot of set indexes could be created just to list non notable subjects and avoid the disambiguation rules on red links. That's my take on it, but I really have no dog in the fight, I was just declining the G14 and taking the most appropriate action as I saw it. KylieTastic (talk) 22:01, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RfD mediation?

[edit]

Hi! A bit ago you offered to mediate a dispute between two users about, among other things, whether BLARed articles could be deleted at RfD. Did that come to anything? It's a rather perennial argument at RfD and I'm staring in the face of yet another set of controversial closures on this topic. Rusalkii (talk) 22:06, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I quite spaced out on my offer to help. Thanks for reminding me. I was in the middle of some much more distracting events at the time. I'd love to dialog about it. Been reading and compiling the last hour or two. There are fine hairs to be split, to be sure. Nobody seems to be in the wrong, for example. Nobody has been acting rashly, though several editors have set some boundaries. BusterD (talk) 14:19, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think I have much to say on my end, as someone who's strongest opinion is that it's a waste of editor energy to rehash this argument afresh on every other BLAR that gets sent to RfD. Rusalkii (talk) 18:43, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question about deleted Haiti Awake page

[edit]

Hello BusterD,

I noticed that the Haiti Awake page was deleted on July 12, 2025, for being promotional (G11). I would like to understand how to improve the page so it meets Wikipedia standards.

Could you provide guidance on what kind of content or sources would make the page acceptable? I want to ensure the page is neutral, verifiable, and properly referenced before attempting to recreate it.

Thank you very much for your help.

Haiti Awake (talk) 02:08, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that in June you created a draft on your userpage to detail an organization called Haiti Awake. I see in July a contributor tagged this userpage as WP:G11 (promotional); it appears I was the administrator who saw the tag that day, verified its validity, and speedily deleted the page. I could have (and should have) added the WP:U5 criteria before I deleted. G11 represents a valid policy objection to the page for its promotional content. U5 represents a valid policy objection to the page for its location (we're not allowed to write article drafts on our own userpage). Further, your account's use of the organizational name is against username policy. So there are a number of issues which need to be resolved. First, you'll need to change your username. Next, you'd be required to fully disclose your association with the subject. To restore such a draft, we'd need to see multiple reliable and independent sources which directly detail the subject. You would create a draft using the articles for creation process, allowing reviewers to provide pre-publication feedback so this proper tagging and deleting does not recur. Sometimes I wish I could merely flip a switch (and make it all better), but there are many, many reasons why that's not going to happen. BusterD (talk) 11:26, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open!

[edit]

Voting for the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open! A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. Voting closes at 23:59 UTC on 29 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Williams (photographer) wikipedia page marked for Speedy Deletion

[edit]

I think you deleted this page. The wikipedia page and it's content was created long before the page you are saying it has copied content from ( https://mwarchive.au/biography was only created this month and has copied content from the wikipedia page). Can you please reverse your Speedy deletion nomination. Bonjours1234 (talk) 13:00, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored it at your request. This is a BLP and I see large numbers of assertions made on the page which are uncited. The dearth of citations is one red-flag for me when I'm evaluating the copyright status of pagespace. Please put citations where none exist. BusterD (talk) 13:43, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Author deletion

[edit]

Hello @BusterD. Could you tell me why you rejected all my author requests for pages I created to be deleted? I don't understand how they can be "not good faith tagging"? Anxioustoavoid (talk) 16:11, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to know why you chose to put every article you've ever created up for speedy all at once. BusterD (talk) 16:17, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@BusterD I didn't. As per policy, the 2 pages I created which have "substantial content" provided by other editors I didn't request be deleted as this would be in violation of policy and rejected. Basically I'm tired of aggro on here and particular tired of putting in hours of work, just for it to be messed with and the admins on here doing nothing while the procedures to report such matters are beyond my comprehension. From my reading of the policy on author requested deletions, I have done nothing wrong and actually you have. All the deletions I requested I have provided the "only substantial content of the page." Your accusation on another talk page that my requests will have "victims" is bizarre. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 16:24, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh and your choice of other admin to go to seems unwise, bearing in mind that particular admin has already taken a negative view of me. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 16:25, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent edits are not impressing me too much either. I came upon this situation as an uninvolved admin responding to speedy tags. Something I do dozens of times each day. In situations where somebody attempts to take down a large body of work (something I very rarely see) I feel some responsibility to the BLP subjects. BusterD (talk) 16:33, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What is wrong with my edits? All 24 pages I have created have full sourcing and the one taken to AFD was quickly kept. I have always acted in good faith. Admittedly a couple of comments I made on AFD were errors on my part and I have acknowledged that but nothing in my editing has been wrong. All 24 pages passed review and would pass AFD. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 16:37, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wrong is an incorrect assessment. Suspicious was the word I had in mind. Your written works are to your credit. I agree with your self assessments. If I was an aspiring fighter, and somebody like you chose to write about me on Wikipedia, I'd be pleased. If on the other hand, my new Wikipedia article was being deleted for purely administrative reasons, I might be unhappy. This likely has nothing to do with you, but your actions resemble a sort of scamming I have often seen and dealt with in the past. Some bad actors have written articles about living people then threaten the article with deletion if some compensation isn't agreed. It's a more common scam than one would expect, often with politicians, entertainers and athletes. BusterD (talk) 16:49, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm here to protect the pedia for the long haul, not just this morning. And these are good works, as I've said. What's the situation which is making you feel like leaving the pedia? BusterD (talk) 16:52, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The same editor keeps changing the infobox on the Valeria Arboleda page from 57kg to featherweight. World Boxing has the weight divisions in kgs so this editor is messing it up. I tried reverting and warning them about edit warring including pointing out that the official weights are in kgs but they keep doing it. I then looked at how to report edit warring but I don't understand the form. I have certain learning difficulties and it's too complicated for me. I just want to research and write. That takes me away from my difficulties. Them someone ruins it and there's no way to get help. If it stays as featherweight it looks like I'm an idiot for not knowing it should be kgs. I don't deal well with inaccuracies, again due to my difficulties. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 16:57, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then ask for help. Take a wikibreak. Make a friend (waving my hand over here). But don't trash such nice work (unless you are getting paid... ;-). BusterD (talk) 17:02, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are not the only human (so challenged with difficulties) in this thread. BusterD (talk) 17:04, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand how to ask for help on here. It's really complicated with all these abbreviations and WP:this and that. It sends me into a mind boggle. I've never been paid to do anything in my life, let alone on here. I just like to write about things I'm interested in. I get a bit obsessed but it's good for me. I feel really silly now. Please accept my apologies. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 17:06, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Allow me to offer mine. BusterD (talk) 17:07, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've got to go walk the huskies, but I'll be back later. If you'd still like me to delete the pages, I'll be happy to do so. If you'd like to cut past all the pillars, policies and guidelines, you're dealing with a human now. Ask me. BusterD (talk) 17:10, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Thank you. I appreciate the kindness. I did feel kind of sad requesting my work be deleted. Can you help me fill in the edit warring report thing? It really bothers me that the infobox keeps getting changed to be incorrect. It's only a small thing I know but it gets to me. I know we don't own Wikipedia pages and I'm totally fine with that. I was pleased when other editors expanded 2 of my stub articles and made them better. But I can't handle deliberately inaccurate alterations. If you can't help me with the form then I'd like to go ahead and request that particular article (Valeria Arboleda) be deleted. If the editor who keeps messing with it wants to write their own and include inaccuracies then that's on them not me. I'm glad you rejected my requests on the other articles. You protected Wikipedia and in a different way, you protected me. Thanks. Oh and huskies are super cool :) Anxioustoavoid (talk) 17:19, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Anxioustoavoid - over here keeping an eye on BusterD ... are they behaving? </sarcasm> Being serious, I would just like to say, I'm sorry my intervention caused you to feel that I was biased against you. If you can believe me, I do not think your efforts to deal with a difficult editor were ill-intentioned. I made my intervention because I wanted you to at least see that it was not a lone editor making a claim. That aside, I echo BusterD's comments appreciative of your contributions and please don't give up. I can't compete with a huskie, but I'll be taking my bassoto nano for a walk shortly. Please feel free to ask me for help anytime; I'll be happy to try. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 21:43, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Goldsztajn Thank you for your kind words. I know I can be guilty of misinterpreting things quite easily and going off the deep end at times. I'm happy to draw a line under the situation and I truly appreciate the supportive messages of both @BusterD and yourself. It is good to have people to ask questions of and I will definitely take up your offer. As I've previously said, I do find Wikipedia's rules and regulations quite complicated and, like many things in life, overwhelming. All the best. P.S Dachshund's are very cute. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 22:21, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia could use more young editors who are willing to admit to themselves they once made an error or two. One of my breakthroughs was the realization no matter how well I composed and edited my wiki work, inevitably somebody was going to come along and make fixes. It sobered me a bit. Over the years I learned to forgive myself for expecting miracles from my efforts. I've committed to merely leaving pagespace behind me better than when I first found it. An infinite range of improvements is still available. Nice to meet you, by the way. BusterD (talk) 22:38, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request for removal of semi-protection from Zubeen Garg

[edit]

I would like to request a reduction of protection on this article. While the semi-protection has been effective in reducing vandalism, it has also significantly limited contributions from local editors. In particular, there are very few Assamese editors active on Wikipedia, and the current protection prevents potential new contributors from improving the article. Since the article has remained relatively stable, I believe it may be appropriate to reduce protection to allow more community participation Dagoofybloke (talk) 12:50, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With the enormous traffic increase the page has seen since the subject's death, I can't justify unprotection at this time. I chose a two week semi-protection period to prevent disruption while traffic is running high. Nobody's stopping new and local contributors from making edit requests on talk; more experienced pagewatchers like yourself may approve them. BusterD (talk) 13:50, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 233, September 2025

[edit]
Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:53, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Roberts (educator)

[edit]

Hi, I noticed you semi-protected this page recently.

Unfortunately, a few hours before you did this, another (relatively new) user moved the page from its original location at Ian Roberts (athlete), where it had been since its creation over ten years ago.

Reading through the content of the article (as well as the infobox, included categories, etc), it is clear that his notability resides much more on being an athlete, and disambiguating him as an "educator" is falling victim to recentism. Would it therefore be possible to return the article to its original location, until a move request can be properly processed? 92.40.192.160 (talk) 20:13, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the move was boldly out-of-process and one can see I fully move protected after the move was performed. I chose to leave the page at the new move target; the subject hasn't been in athletic competition for 25 years. I'll start a discussion on talk myself, but it's difficult for me to foresee any discussion which moves it back. BusterD (talk) 22:24, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Recreated page of NBC News' Sam Brock under draft article

[edit]

I know you already deleted this page before twice and it was my fault for not perfecting it correctly but fingers crossed, I've decided to put a new, improved article for him under the draft in my own words this time because I want it to go through for inclusion. It seems creating and editing Wikipedia pages has become a new hobby to me in recent months. R2025kt (talk) 14:29, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict × with my edits at User talk:R2025kt) . I have just now applied a final warning to your talk page. Stop recreating any drafts on this subject at this time. You have demonstrated you are actively unwilling to restrain yourself. BusterD (talk) 14:38, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok R2025kt (talk) 14:40, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]