Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 11:31, 31 October 2023

Jim	Talk	Contribs	Sandbox	Logs	Blocks	Deletions	Protections	Scripts	Bird talk	Commons

Deletion entry Lou-Marié Kruger

Hi, you deleted my entry on the psychologist and author Lou-Marié Kruger. While I do cite her own work I do also cite independent articles on her and her book. Could you please reverse the deletion and allow me to edit accordingly. I think a deletion in this regard is slightly hasty, please allow for revision. (your note: "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: self written vanity page, see WP:COI, WP:RS, WP:Notability (people), supposed independent sources are mainly her own papers.")

Thanks.

Mattmorton99 (talk) 13:43, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Replied on user talk page, lacks indepedent sources, promotes her book, COI query Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:27, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Women's Hub For Safety

Hello Jimfbleak -- I declined this a minute before you deleted it. It doesn't stand much chance of leaving draftspace, but it doesn't seem to me to meet G11. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 15:34, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Espresso Addict I missed that, restored now, apologies Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:37, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Cheers! Espresso Addict (talk) 15:38, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

SwitchBot

Hi, a couple of weeks ago you G11'd SwitchBot. Would you be able and willing to check and let me know who created that, please? It has been created again, and my spidey sense is tingling a bit so I'm trying to find out if they're somehow connected. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:11, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

DoubleGrazing created by blocked user Z812483032. FWIW, the new text is substantially different from the deleted version, so although it may well be another sock, it isn't an obvious "same junk" case, although still junk Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:26, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, very helpful! Gives me something to go to SPI with. Cheers, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:30, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Pedro Albizu Campos The Formative Years 1893-1923

Hi @JimfbleakJimfbleak, thanks for the note to pin @Bbb23 but the draft article was deleted. In sum, the article is about the Pedro Albizu Campos Digital Resource Collection which is a primary source of archival documents, records, and letters now only becoming publicly available and accessible to the public for educational and research purposes. I am the cataloger and librarian for the digital collection as I curate archival material for it. I don't promote myself as a librarian, I don't make money from it, it does not produce any income, promotion, or anything for me. The site is: https://www.donpedroalbizucampos.com Additionally, it is listed as an OER Commons source and on other collaborating libraries as well. See: https://oercommons.org/search?f.search=Pedro+Albizu+Campos&f.general_subject=&f.sublevel=&f.alignment_standard=

As I mentioned to @Bbb23, perhaps the confusion is the name chosen. A better name would be "Pedro Albizu Digital Resource Collection," and this name would mirror the digital library resource. Others have had digital resource collections on Misplaced Pages. See:https://www.dlib.org/dlib/may07/lally/05lally.html

Thank you. If not, should I proceed to create a new article with the new name? Thanks again. Verificatur (talk) 17:28, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Verificatur You are a paid employee of the library and have a COI even if you are not paid specifically to write about it. Before we can discuss anything else, you must declare that COI as you have been told several times already Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:03, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Jim. I'm not a paid employee of the library. I curated and cataloged, unpaid, for free, the archival collection. But ok. Thanks. I'll leave it that. Thank you for your time. Verificatur (talk) 06:09, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Verificatur, a far more important issue is that your draft was entirely unreferenced, which is a severe policy violation. Your draft completely failed to make the case that this specific topic is notable, as Misplaced Pages defines that term. High quality references to reliable, independent published sources are the prerequisite to any acceptable Misplaced Pages article. You should find acceptable sources first, format them into references, and then neutrally summarize what the sources say. You must rigorously exclude everything that you have learned through personal experience, and include only what is verified by independent, reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 06:25, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. The topic is very notable. My draft was not even remotely completed and I have plenty of high quality references indepedently published in authoritative sources. I was just beginning to write and made the mistake of clicking on "Publish." I'll re-read the policies and recommendations, Thanks.104.165.88.155 (talk) 06:37, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328 Thank you. The topic is very notable. My draft was not even remotely completed and I have plenty of high quality references indepedently published in authoritative sources. I was just beginning to write and made the mistake of clicking on "Publish." I'll re-read the policies and recommendations, Thanks. I find the process very interesting and wonder why the same scrutiny did not take place on another article published about this same subject. The other article is rife with statements that are unverified, not citations, no references. Such is life. Thanks. 104.165.88.155 (talk) 08:03, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Verificatur, a topic is not notable because one Misplaced Pages editor asserts that it is notable. It is considered notable only when convincing evidence is provided, in the form of multiple references to published, reliable independent sources that devote significant coverage to the topic. You ask about why the same scrutiny did not take place on another article published about this same subject. Since you did not give us the name of the other article, it is difficult to give specific feedback. If you provided a link to that article, and it is as bad as you say, perhaps it should be deleted. The English language Misplaced Pages, after all, currently has 6,735,817 articles, and it is impossible for any volunteer editor to be familiar with more than a tiny percentage of them. All experienced editors know that there are at least a million mediocre or bad articles, and volunteers work constantly worldwide to either improve or delete low quality articles. We do not want even more articles that fail to comply with our core content policies. Cullen328 (talk) 08:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Muhammad Hisham Muhammad Isma’il Abu Ghazala

Hi,

You speedily deleted Muhammad Hisham Muhammad Isma’il Abu Ghazala as a copyright violation. I looked at that article prior to the G12 tagging, as did @Diannaa:. The material is PD as a US government work, and Diannaa added the attribution for the material. Can you please review and undelete. Thanks. -- Whpq (talk) 17:46, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Whpq and Diannaa:, OK, done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 20:09, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Whpq (talk) 02:14, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Deletion

Hi @Jimfbleak, you did delete an article User:Geophrey O/sandbox about Rosemary Njage, an artist. Kindly provide the reasons why? Geophrey O (talk) 10:47, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Replied on user talk page, fact-free fan page Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:25, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Goethals Bridge (1928–2017)

Hi Jimfbleak,

the exact wording incriminated by @Dan arndt: has been present in the Goethals Bridge article already at 13 October 2011. Therefore no copyvio exists: Mr. Cheatle has simply copied the Misplaced Pages article existing in 2013, his remark "copyright 2013 GCheatle" only relates to the photo. Thank you in advance!

PS: I've asked about how to proceed with the version history on the currently deleted talk page.--U. M. Owen (talk) 11:23, 31 October 2023 (UTC)