This is Deb's talk page, where you can send her messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29

This is Deb's talk page, where you can send her messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29

Coming here to ask why I deleted your article? Read this page first...

If that doesn't help, read these FAQs.

1. Why did you delete my page when I hadn't finished writing it?

Answer: Don't create new articles unless you are sure they meet wikipedia's criteria, particularly notability and verifiability. If you want to practice, there is the sandbox facility and Wikipedia:Articles for creation where you can get a second opinion from a more experienced contributor. And if you really can't help yourself, use {{underconstruction}} so other people will know you are still working on it.

2. Why did you delete my page for advertising? I wasn't trying to advertise!

Answer: Read Wikipedia:NPOV for guidance on how to word an article so that it doesn't sound like an advertisement.

3. Why did you delete my page for advertising? It was about a non-profit organisation!

Answer: Non-profit organisations advertise all the time - it's still promotion and the rule applies to them just as it does to commercial bodies. See no 2 above.

4. Why did you delete my article without warning?

Answer: Because you are not entitled to a warning if you don't follow the guidelines. See no 1 above.

5. Why didn't you do a google search and find references for my article and put them in for me instead of just deleting it?

Answer: Because I don't have time to do the boring bits for you. I have enough boring bits of my own to work on, thank you.

6. You have a very interesting view of neutrality. The authors you give credence to have a definite point of view and you discount those that disagree.

Answer: There is of course no answer because this is not a question. It's a snide comment added by someone who doesn't understand the NPOV rule. Possibly a Ricardian revisionist.

And please SIGN YOUR POSTS, otherwise I don't know who is asking me the question!

Archives: 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29

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

Administrator changes

• Billinghurst
• Crisco 1492
• DarkFalls
• Spike Wilbury
• Valereee
• Ergo Sum

CheckUser changes

Vanamonde93

Arbitration

• After a motion, arbitration enforcement page protections no longer need to be logged in the AELOG. A bot now automatically posts protections at WP:AELOG/P. To facilitate this bot, protection summaries must include a link to the relevant CT page (e.g. [[WP:CT/BLP]]), and you will receive talk page reminders if you forget to specify the contentious topic but otherwise indicate it is an AE action.

---

Hi Deb. I just noticed evidence of block evasion with an account you blocked, Tzmediahouse. They created Draft:Ebonny Musik, which you deleted as G11 and blocked them. The next day, another account popped up - TzolaTz - and recreated the same draft. Hardly coincidence, I think. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 22:37, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I've been away on holiday and once again I wasn't able to log in on my phone. I'll have a look. Deb (talk) 14:07, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:13, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deb I want to challenge your speedy deletion here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghulam_Rasool_Dehlvi as I beleive that subject atleast passes; WP: Basic ; and A4 does not applicable here as it was significantly different from the deleted version, as far as I can see from Wikipedia mirror website. Please undelete it per contested Deletion and allow me to work there; and will be happy if you allow independent adminstrator to make their judgement. 121.46.87.82 (talk) 13:38, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was completely different from the decade old 2016 version. So A4 no longer applies there. 121.46.87.82 (talk) 14:08, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In a way you're correct in saying that it was significantly different from the deleted version. In fact, it was shorter than the original version, with fewer references, so it's very unlikely to meet the inclusion criteria. However, I could restore it to draft. You don't seem to have edited previously, so you should practise before you start trying to create articles. Deb (talk) 14:09, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure; 121.46.87.82 (talk) 14:29, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In this way I will also get enough time to improve it in draft space. 121.46.87.82 (talk) 14:30, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Deb Hey, it seems you forgot to restore the requested draft? 121.46.87.82 (talk) 12:44, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Have you done any practice yet? Deb (talk) 12:46, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What? I don't need any practice to make edits in the draft space. You are unnecessarily extending the process? 121.46.87.82 (talk) 12:47, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What's the great rush? Do you have a conflict of interest? Deb (talk) 12:52, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No great rush? My request is idle for the past 25 hours? 121.46.87.82 (talk) 12:52, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may be under the impression that I have nothing else to do but respond to your requests. I consider this to be low priority, and you could be doing something useful while you are waiting. Deb (talk) 12:56, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Deb; I have tried to improve the draft following your advice above; I think that things have changed in the decade and Subject do pass WP:Basic at the moment. Requesting you to send this back to main space per WP:DRAFTOBJECT. Thanks.121.46.87.246 (talk) 07:57, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will be happy if you will allow independent new page patroller or admin to patrol this in main space. Regards 121.46.87.246 (talk) 08:13, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not in mainspace, in draft. Follow the instructions to submit it for review. Deb (talk) 08:27, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Deb You Can't force me to bound with AFC; as it is not a compulsory process; if you think it still needs significant improvements then please let me know so that I can improve a bit more before it is moved to main space. Just wanted to say you that I am skipping AFC here. Thanks 121.46.87.246 (talk) 08:30, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're a brand-new user and you should go through the normal process. You've flatly refused to practise editing, which leads me to the conclusion that you do have a connection with the subject that you haven't declared; nevertheless I've given you a second chance, so use it wisely. Deb (talk) 08:35, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:BUREAUCRACY . I have no connection with the subject hence declaring no conflict of interest. Although you can assume anything you like but you can't impose your wishes on others. See What Wikipedia is not. 121.46.87.246 (talk) 08:39, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please follow the correct procedure as instructed. Deb (talk) 08:45, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not bound to AFC. Either send this to main space or recommend changes to improve the draft. 121.46.87.246 (talk) 08:46, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red | November 2025, Vol 11, Issue 11, Nos. 326, 327, 353, 354 Recognized as the most active topic-based WikiProject by human changes. Online events: New: Alphabet run: U, V, W | Asian women Continuing, year-long initiatives: #1day1woman | Music Announcements: Women in Red's Asian women event is part of the global Wikipedia Asian Month 2025 campaign. You are welcome to add your contributions to both event pages. Tip of the Month: Verifiability is increasingly important as AI evolves. You should ensure that every statement made is adequately sourced. There should be no less than three independent reliable sources for each biography, including at least one source for each paragraph. Progress ("moving the needle"): Statistics available via various tools: previously, Humaniki tool; currently, QLever. Thank you if you contributed one or more of the 20,473 articles created in the past year. 21 Oct 2024, 19.963% of biographies on EN-WP were about women (2,030,245 biographies; 405,305 women) 28 Oct 2025: 20.23% of biographies on EN-WP were about women (2,094,677 biographies; 423,778 women) Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help wanted! Want to apply your skills or learn new ones? Help us plan monthly events, design event logos, come up with a tip-of-the-month, and/or provide any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest

--Rosiestep (talk) 17:05, 30 October 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Hello, Deb. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.

Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.

How do temporary accounts work?

• When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern: ~2025-12345-67 (a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5).
• All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
• A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
• As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
  • There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
  • There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.

Temporary account IP viewer user right

• Administrators may grant the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right to non-administrators who meet the criteria for granting. Importantly, an editor must make an explicit request for the permission (e.g. at WP:PERM/TAIV)—administrators are not permitted to assign the right without a request.
• Administrators will automatically be able to see temporary account IP information once they have accepted the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy via Special:Preferences or via the onboarding dialog which comes up after temporary accounts are deployed.

Impact for administrators

• It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects the autoblock option.
• It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
• Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. On Special:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should use Special:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).

Rules about IP information disclosure

• Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access is generally not allowed (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or ~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
• Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward 3RR, but not Hey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67)
• See Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can't be said for more detailed guidelines.

Useful tools for patrollers

• It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via the User Info card, available in Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card
  • This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
• Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
• Similarly, Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account's activity.
• The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.

Videos

• How to use Special:IPContributions
• How automatic IP reveal works
• How to use IP Info
• How to use User Info

Further information and discussion

• For more information and discussion regarding this change, please see the announcement from the Wikimedia Foundation at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § Temporary accounts rollout.

Most of this message was written by Mz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃 SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think they need to have been created more than six months to meet current criteria. I think it sucks, but no one asked me. Maybe WP:MFD? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:59, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, i'll find another way. Deb (talk) 12:12, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:06, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And also U7 only applies to user subpages, not top-level userpages. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:31, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a bit weird that, isn't it? Deb (talk) 08:28, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have WP:U7BLANK, which allows you to blank top-level userpages (instead of completely deleting them) if they fall under U7 otherwise. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:36, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but sometimes you need the history to be deleted so they can't just bring back the previous version. Deb (talk) 08:35, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We really need WP:U7BLANKANDREVDEL... Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:12, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

Toadspike

• Elahrairah
• Juliancolton
• Magnus Manske

CheckUser changes

asilvering

Guideline and policy news

• The speedy deletion criteria U5 has been repealed, with U6 and U7 replacing it. See the FAQ for more clarifications.
• Community-designated contentious topics may now be enforced and appealed at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard (AE) as a result of an RfC.

Technical news

• You can enable a handy user info card next to usernames, which when clicked displays edit count, blocks, thanks, and other information. To enable this feature, visit Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Transgender healthcare and people has been closed
  • Uninvolved administrators may impose an AE participation restriction on any thread at the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard.

Miscellaneous

• An unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in November 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

---

George Martin has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 03:14, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I wanted to reach out because I noticed your double-draftification of Draft:Radhika Bhide. The first time you draftified the article, you provided the rationale that the article was moved from draft without review by inexperienced user. However, autoconfirmed users are not required to submit their draft articles through AfC. Additionally, this does not meet any of the criteria listed at WP:DRAFTREASON. The second time you draftified the article, you indicated that the editor's move out of draftspace was an instance of WP:MOVEVANDAL. Though you didn't provide a rationale, I presume you thought this was vandalism because you find the editor too inexperienced to move their article out of draftspace. However, as stated above, this is an invalid draftification reason. Further, this marks an invalid draftification per WP:DRAFTOBJECT, given that page creators are allowed to object to the draftification of their article (unless they have a COI). As such, I have reverted your second draftification as invalid. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:02, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, looking at the editor's talk page, I see that you didn't notify them about the draftification either time. This is all very bitey behaviour. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:08, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Significa liberdade And the worst part here is they have admin protected the page. Weird enough. Also see other concerns raised by @Deepfriedokra, @Chaotic Enby and @User:Pppery ~2025-32933-07 (talk) 00:58, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Link to concerns I raised would jog my memory. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:25, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing any page protection. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 01:42, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle says no protection. Protection log reads, "2025-11-03T09:24:41 Deb... protected Radhika Bhide [Create=Require administrator access] (expires 2026-11-03T09:24:41) ". So the main space version was create protected, but I guess that got overridden by the dedraftification move. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:50, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Significa liberdade https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Radhika+Bhide ~2025-32902-76 (talk) 01:52, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To editorialize a bit cause I'm tired and my internal censor is down, I would have ECP'd instead of FP. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:58, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain why you would have PP'd at all? Looking at the page history, I see that one editor has created the page, then moved it into mainspace, which is in their right to do. Deb moved it back to draftspace without a valid rationale, then the creator objected, which, again, is within their right to do (unless there's an assumed COI, which hasn't been stated). Deb once again draftified in violation of DRAFTOBJECT. I see no reason this page should be protected at all. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 13:34, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My recollection is that the article creator has used more than one name and recreated the article after this warning, following which they indicated that they would not do any further COI editing. Then they proceeded to do exactly that, which is why I didn't tell them again. In fact, they have a history of creating promotional drafts (which Draft:Radhika Bhide fairly obviously was, in my opinion). If you think that's okay, we obviously see this project differently. Deb (talk) 09:09, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The link you provided is telling them they are not allowed to write an autobiography. Firstly, this is not the case. Editors are strongly discouraged from writing autobiographies, but they are not disallowed. Secondly, the editor agreed not to write about themselves anymore, and they haven't. Lastly, can you explain what you mean when you say, My recollection is that the article creator has used more than one name? Are you stating that the article the editor created was, in fact, about themselves, despite publishing under a different name, or that you believe this editor has used a different account? If you are insinuating the former, I highly doubt that is the case, given that they provided photographs for both biographies -- not to mention that one is a man and one is a woman (see the deleted autobiography). If you think this person has edited using a different account, that's a separate issue. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 13:28, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not suggesting that. I'm saying that this editor, in his response to me, used what appears to be the name of his organisation - Aditya Jagdhane Music (he never registered under this name, which is that of his website, but he signed with it). Inexperienced users, particularly those whose first language isn't English, often need to have things spelled out to them. If you tell them that it's okay to create an autobiography, they will often fail to understand how the guidelines apply. Tell them they are not allowed to and they generally stop trying to do it. However, I'm glad to see that someone else is now making an effort to fix the promotional article about Radhika Bhide which User:AdityaJagdhane07 created. Deb (talk) 13:53, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And why did you not block him for violating WP:Username. @Deb: Catfurball (talk) 18:06, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That wouldn't have been a valid reason. Deb (talk) 19:37, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! I just noticed your recent draftification of Afshin Azizi, which I have reverted. This was an invalid draftification for multiple reasons. First, the article has been in mainspace for over 90 days, making it ineligible for draftification per WP:DRAFTNO. Second, the article had already been draftified, then moved back into mainspace, making it ineligible for draftification per WP:DRAFTOBJECT. Lastly, as stated above, "inexperienced users" are able to move their articles from draftspace to mainspace. If you have an issue with that, raise it elsewhere. Do not punish new editors for taking actions they are "legally" allowed to make. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 18:50, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. It's blatant advertising so I will delete it. Deb (talk) 08:46, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think you mistakenly deleted User talk:Nexarioncommunity while deleting the associated userpage. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 17:31, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, you're right. Deb (talk) 19:35, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Deb Hi Deb, I am looking for peer review on my draft page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Leverage_Edu. Please guide me with procedure - Filmybuff (talk) 11:29, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to re-submit before anyone will look at it. Deb (talk) 12:53, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Deb I understood, I wanted to know, If i am following WP:CORP, Added secondary and neutral sources. What tools, should I use for the same. I dont want to miss any Wikipedia Guidelines. Can you please guide - Filmybuff (talk) 12:56, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would need to review it and I am busy with other things. Please submit it and another experienced contributor will look at it. Deb (talk) 13:24, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So, you're reverting my single addition to 1897 in literature, because of "no citation", but completely ignore the rest of the page without citation. Well, you better hurry up and delete ever damn one of them, and then move on to 1886, 1887, 1888, 1889, 1890, 1891, 1892, 1893, 1894, 1895, 1896, 1898, 1899, 1900, 1901, 1902, 1903, 1904, 1905, 1906 and so on, because none of them cite when new books are released:

Lidenbrock (talk) 15:19, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine that, not having done much editing yourself, you are unaware of the guideline, agreed in 2017, that all information added to Wikipedia articles must be accompanied by a citation, otherwise it will be subject to deletion. You also won't have read my talk page archive so you'll be unaware of how many contributors have come here to argue with me about it and all of them get the same answer. I spend hours and hours removing additions that don't have citations attached, but it's a bit of an uphill struggle when editors fail to read the messages at the top of the page. Most of the content you point to was added to the article well before you ever started editing, and fixing these things in retrospect is difficult. Maybe you'd like to help rather than criticising. Deb (talk) 15:32, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing so much of the "dirty work" on WP. You're a champ! TURKEYDICAE🦃 19:08, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Deb, Thank you for reviewing the draft article, I see the article failed to meet the non-advertising guidelines stipulated. We are trying to create an informative article that highlights the history of the company and our founders story rather than promoting individual products. I know you must be very busy but do you have any tips or suggestions for the draft page in order to get it approved for the main space?

Thanks again AliciaAspenClean (talk) 20:01, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When you say "we", who do you mean? You are not allowed to share your user account with anyone else. Please read Wikipedia:When your boss tells you to edit Wikipedia for further advice. Deb (talk) 08:58, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The page is Khương Hữu Lộc Fkhuong (talk) 16:08, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have already had warnings on your talk page about your Conflict of interest. Please heed them and don't try to write about your family in future. Deb (talk) 16:19, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Fkhuong Please inform your brother that creating an article about him is effectively impossible. For more info please read WP:BOSS. 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 08:38, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I don't quite understand the reason why you removed my entry on the 1972 page. What do you mean by inline citations? How can my entry on the person in question be acceptable? Benzekre (talk) 19:59, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You need to add an inline citation (see Wikipedia:Citing sources) to prove that the person was born/died on that particular date. Deb (talk) 08:53, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. I re-added the content with a citation and also a small picture. All good now? Benzekre (talk) 09:20, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, looks okay. Deb (talk) 09:30, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 1967 in music, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 12:27, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red | November 2025, Vol 11, Issue 12, Nos. 326, 327, 355, 356, 357 Recognized as the most active topic-based WikiProject by human changes. Online events: New: Alphabet run X, Y, Z | Food and drink | Women who died in 2025 Continuing, year-long initiatives: #1day1woman | Music Announcements: Global Translat-a-thon 2025 06 December 2025 Tip of the Month: Lists of deaths by year is a good resource for the December / January meet-up Women who died in 2025 Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help wanted! Want to apply your skills or learn new ones? Help us plan monthly events, design event logos, come up with a tip-of-the-month, and/or provide any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest

--Rosiestep (talk) 22:16, 28 November 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Greetings respected member of Wikipedia,

I am user PaadumParavai. I've contributed to many highly viewed articles and edited well established publications in the wikipedia. I just published my own article few hours ago and I see it now being deleted for the following reasons'' section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion'' I Kindly request you to please permit me a strict time to edit the article and make it right as per wikipedia norms by making the entire article neutral and encylopedic. This definitely was not intended to be a promotional article. Rather it was meant to be a showcase of a person's Presence and personal career in media profile.

My page is ''Super Singer Lynet'' I highly request you to kindly let me to edit it and send it for a review. Thank you Deb, for your consideration. PaadumParavai (talk) 09:44, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Deb Hearty request for you madam to let me a chance to make it right. Thank you PaadumParavai (talk) 09:45, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You have not done many edits at all so you don't have the track record you suggest. You should start by reading Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, which is a policy that must be followed. If you want to try to create a new and better article, you can, but you must first declare your conflict of interest as instructed and you should also submit the draft for review, rather than trying to put it straight into mainspace; I don't think it will meet the notability criteria for inclusion in any case. Deb (talk) 09:50, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thank for your advice. May I please get a chance to edit it once and submit for a review? I kindly request you to permit me to carve a better version of my article. I've read the sectional charges applied on my article and understood the norms. I am on my work to make the changes. May i please make it now?

Thought i attached several verified authors links and reference i agree the article written was not neutral. Hence please permit me once to make a edit, Ill be finishing the edit within some time now. PaadumParavai (talk) 09:54, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Deb PaadumParavai (talk) 10:23, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You'll have to start from scratch. You can ask any questions at Wikipedia:Teahouse. Deb (talk) 12:38, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Deb, I have no major conflict of interest creating page for East West Medical College Hospital. From their website I collected few info which I used to create the page. Can you please tell me how to restore the page and what are the recommendation that I should follow to avoid this unwanted deletation? Best regards Megheraalapon (talk) 11:55, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can't restore the page because it was written promotionally. Please read the guidelines. Deb (talk) 12:33, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I understand. Thank you for your response. Now do I need to create the same page following all the guidelines again? Can I do that starting from scratch again? Or is there any tine limit till I cant create page in same name? Megheraalapon (talk) 15:40, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't follow all the guidelines so you can't follow them "again", and you will have to start from scratch if you want to create this page. Whatever you do, don't use their website as your main reference. Deb (talk) 15:42, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noted, thanks for your kind feedback. Best regards Megheraalapon (talk) 15:44, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I got a COI warning on my talk page even though I wasn't creating any pages. Was this a mistake, or was it for something else? ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 15:40, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I must have mistaken you for someone else whose talk page you were on. Deb (talk) 16:09, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Danny de Hek. 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. Iiii I I I (talk) 22:18, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry, this is my first time requesting undeletion and I missed the note on WP:DELREVD about discussing with the closer first. Here was the statement I left about the page:

Danny de Hek was speedy deleted earlier today under criteria G11 (unambiguous advertising or promotion). The page admittedly needed cleanup and had some weird edit warring in the page history, but I don't think the wording was promotional, and it was not anywhere near unambiguous. It cited at least one in-depth profile by the New York Times and some other articles by New Zealand publications (I don't remember exactly). I attempted a few edits removing WP:OR before it was tagged and deleted.

The CSD template itself was added by a user who has some kind of ongoing vendetta with the subject of the page, judging by messages left on Talk:Danny de Hek – I believe this was a bad faith tagging.

Iiii I I I (talk) 22:27, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is accurate. The subject of the page seems to make a lot of enemies like other scam baiters. So many editors are out with long knives to get the page removed or add slanderous material. I am glad you caught this. M20294135122 (talk) 13:05, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Deb, I believe you have been mislead on the Danny de Hek page by the editor Philosophysubboy https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Philosophysubboy&action=history

Please look at the users history. You'll see that he has been accused of COI and paid editing numerous times on Pakistan related topics. Danny de Hek has written extensively about Pakistan based criminal organizations such as the ones that take payment, promising Wikipedia pages to people and then ghosts them, so there's likely some COI there.

Philosophysubboy has removed many notes left for him on his Talk Page by senior editors accusing him of paid editing. M20294135122 (talk) 13:03, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

• Chaotic Enby
• Rjjiii

Valereee

• Fathoms Below
• Tamzin

CheckUser changes

Spicy

Technical news

• Starting on November 4, the IP addresses of logged-out editors are no longer being publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account associated with their edits.
• Administrators will now find that Special:MergeHistory is now significantly more flexible about what it can merge. It can now merge sections taken from the middle of the history of the source (rather than only the start) and insert revisions anywhere in the history of the destination page (rather than only the start). T382958

Miscellaneous

• The December 2025 administrator elections are scheduled from Nov 25 – Dec 15.
• An Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in December 2025, with over 1,000 drafts awaiting review from the past two months. In addition to AfC participants, all administrators and new page patrollers can help review using the Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!

---

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 1840 in Wales, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 09:37, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CMG Worldwide is [Create=Require administrator access]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?fulltext=1&search=%22CMG+Worldwide%22 has 32 Results:

Jayne Mansfield ... Ingrid Bergman

I want to start a stub to explain the business for those articles via wikilink

with Wikipedia:Protection policy#Extended confirmed protection

Piñanana (talk) 03:13, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you're asking so I can't help. Deb (talk) 09:01, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]