Misplaced Pages

User talk:MrsSnoozyTurtle

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk | contribs) at 22:52, 31 May 2022 (→Draft:Colors TV: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 22:52, 31 May 2022 by MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk | contribs) (→Draft:Colors TV: Reply)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Upwork profile

Hope you are well. Its a humble request that please stop damaging pages where you were not hired and/or you see them on Upwork. I know your Upwork profile but I don't want to get in details. You can't win by damaging others, this is not healthy for you or anyone in the long run. What is yours will be yours, you are earning very well there so let's make a good working environment instead of creating problems to satisfy our greed and ego. Just think it won't benefit anyone and no one can handle all the work alone. Hope you will take this under consideration. Good luck stay blessed. Thanks 20:16, 25 May 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.66.19.248 (talk)

Hello 41.66.19.248. Is that so? I am not afraid of the truth, so which Upwork profile to you think is mine? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:26, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Mark Lynn

Hello, MrsSnoozyTurtle,

I see articles that you have PROD'd and concur with your decisions on these articles so I was wondering what you thought of this rather promotional article. Lots of references but it seems like this optometrist is primarily influential due to his monetary gifts which, to be honest, are fairly common among the wealthy class in the U.S. Hoping you could give it a review. Thanks! Liz 02:59, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello Liz. I'm humbled that you asked for my thoughts on the article. Thank you. I looked through the article and sources before reading your message, and ended up having the same mixed thoughts as you! It's quite a tricky call regarding whether he has standalone notability or it is WP:INHERITED from the two stadia which he purchased the naming rights to. Sorry, this indecision probably isn't much help...
On second thought, given his business activities, I suspect there is more coverage out there that would get him across the line for WP:NBIO. But I agree that the article is quite promotional, and there is something fishy about its author (they made some very sophisticated AfD arguments in their first edits). I hope this mess of thoughts is somehow useful! Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 04:09, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
This is exactly what I was looking for, thank you for taking the time to evaluate the article for me. It's hard for me to appreciate an article that is basically about a rich optometrist who has structures named after himself when we have articles about academics and authors deleted because of marginal notability but if you think Lynn is borderline notable, then I won't take any further action. I wouldn't be surprised to see it nominated for deletion at some point in its future. Liz 19:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 May 2022

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:47, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Colors TV

I noticed you moved this to Draft: space. I'm not really sure that this is covered by WP:Draftify, and suspect AfD might have been more appropriate? Equally, I know you will have had your reasons for doing so. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Faddle 🇺🇦 08:15, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

An explanation as to why 2d of WP:DRAFTIFY does not apply is needed. Whpq (talk) 12:52, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
2.d says "The page is a recent creation by an inexperienced editor. Older articles should not be draftified. As a rule of thumb, articles older than 90 days should not be draftified without prior consensus at AfD."
This article was first created as a draft in May 2020, and was accepted by an AFC reviewer a few days later after a flurry of activity. A largish number of different editors have edited it. It is thus an "older Article" and not a candidate for draftifcation.
The reviewer who accepted it has returned it to mainspace. That doesn't make it an article that should be retained, it just suggests that draftification was not the best choice. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Faddle 🇺🇦 19:55, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks Timtrent and Whpq. Yes I got mixed up and thought it was a new article. Sorry for the mistake, and thanks for fixing it up. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:52, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

June events from Women in Red

Women in Red June 2022, Vol 8, Issue 6, Nos 214, 217, 227, 231, 232, 233


Online events:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 09:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Diamond Schmitt Architects

You had proposed deletion for the article just a little over a week ago. I contested that proposed deletion and left an explanation on the article talk page. Tagging the article for speedy deletion was not appropriate. -- Whpq (talk) 12:47, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Colors TV

Hi, i've reverted your move of this article to draftspace as it is a two year old article and the timelimit for draftification is articles younger than 3 months. Also the article has been edited by many editors apart from the blocked ones including myself so movement to draft on coi and upe grounds is also inappropriate on those grounds but the main point is the age of the article, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 19:35, 31 May 2022 (UTC)