Hello @cryptic. I have been looking through the page MXE Entertainment and it clearly shows no advertisments and has reliable such as the real competitions results for the awards, Notices and News from the MXE Entertainment original websites and some magazines such as Channel Magazine and the Westlake Boys High School website and Westlake Girls website. This shows that this it uses secondary sources from other websites that is not from its own. The person who made this page was not releated to anyone in MXE Entertainment and I thinks this dosnt deserve to be apart of the Speedy deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.92.24.75 (talk) 01:29, 9 June 2017‎ (UTC)[reply]

@cryptic I have read this wikipedia page and I disagree with remvoving this page because it has secondary sources such as a magazine and also other relevent websites. This page also has alot of reliable sources which explains and shows proof of the information and text of this article and wiki page. There are alot of fans of MXE Entertainment artists and I think they wont be happy with this deletion nomination. This page is fine to be a wiki page but it just needs more editiong. Please remove this deletion nomination from the wiki page MXE Entertainment as MXE Entertainment deserves recognition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pppx1 (talk • contribs) 01:41, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please read this brief article about the First Law of Holes, to start with. You've dug yourself into quite a deep one.

First order of business - The Wikipedia community is intolerant of people who create lots of accounts and log out to edit as IPs in order to avoid blocks and to look like they're multiple people. Extremely intolerant, and you've gotten to the point where we've been blocking you on sight, and deleting things you've written on sight merely because it was you that wrote them, without even having to debate them on their merits, as I tried to do at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MXE Entertainment. It's possible to come back from sockpuppetry this severe, but only just barely: I've seen it happen maybe twice. There's a guide at WP:SOCKBLOCK, and you'd do well to read that entire page.

As for the article itself: to all appearances, this "company" exists only in the mind of its high-school-age founder, who doubled down by creating a site for it through a predatory website-builder website and falsely claimed his moderately-successful high school choir was "signed" to the company (which I expect would both surprise and dismay the other students, their director, and their school). I've been proven wrong about such things before, it's true; but proof comes in the form of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, and you've yet to provide that - and no, articles that have only passing coverage of the choir and don't even mention either you or this company aren't significant coverage. On the other hand, you've gotten articles about yourself protected from creation at at least three titles so far; there's an amusing, though a bit overly jargon-laden, essay at User:JzG/And the band played on... about what continuing down this path will lead to even if you do someday become notable. —Cryptic 07:06, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A masterful explanation to someone that wastes everyone's time. Legacypac (talk) 07:15, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me to recreate Wynyard Group page as its a notable company and its wikipedia page must exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by James aaron (talk • contribs) 11:55, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@James aaron: Four thoughts, in no particular order.

• If you're employed by the company or otherwise being compensated to create the article, you must formally declare that, per our Terms of Use, specifically §4.7, Paid contributions without disclosure. After that, please read our guidelines on editing with a conflict of interest (simplified summary, full guideline).
• Any article you create is going to have to be completely in your own words, not copied from the company's web page. (Though I do apologize for my mispaste of a different url at the start of my deletion summary.)
  • Even if you happen to have written the text on that webpage, we can't re-use it here without going through all the requirements at WP:DCM, which, in particular, grant everyone in the world a free license to copy and modify it. Hardly any organizations of any size are willing to do this, especially once their legal departments get wind of the idea.
• You'll have to show that the company meets our inclusion criteria (full version, simplified (but non-specific) summary). In particular, reprints of the company's press releases and links to searches for them are of no use.
• I suggest submitting the article through the Articles for Creation system rather than attempting to create it directly in mainspace. —Cryptic 12:13, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will follow the same. Will contact you if need your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by James aaron (talk • contribs) 13:03, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cryptic, I am trying to do a page for myself being the only computer literate punk rocker in the crew, I am just KINDA getting the hang of wikipedia. You took down a page I tried to create cuz I blanked it. I figure I'll try harder tomorrow with better references, I was being lazy and didn't really list too much. I will try to adhere to wikipedia's standards better next go around. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Earl E. Smith (talk • contribs) 08:51, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Earl E. Smith: You should really read our guideline at WP:Autobiography, and at least skim our inclusion criteria at WP:Notability (music). I don't edit musicians' articles much, but it looks like you probably do meet our criteria; any article you write should make that clear. In any case, I strongly, strongly recommend you create the article through the WP:Articles for creation process rather than directly in mainspace. —Cryptic 09:03, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Cryptic! I will try it then when I do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Earl E. Smith (talk • contribs) 19:37, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:James_aaron/sandbox

Hi,

Could you please tell what all changes need to be done in this page? Accordingly we will modify it so that can make it live soon.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by James aaron (talk • contribs) 12:32, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(moved to User talk:James aaron, since I included a formal warning. —Cryptic 10:50, 23 June 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Hello Cryptic, I am trying to create a wiki page for the song artist, Lil Pump. I do not know everything that there is to know, but I feel that I know enough to at least get the page going. I know his birth name, Gazzy Garcia, his birthday, August 17, 2000, and some of his background. And hopefully we could avoid any possible deletion again. Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TrapperOfTheCentury (talk • contribs) 14:27, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@TrapperOfTheCentury: Work on the draft at Draft:Lil Pump. You're going to have to provide evidence that he meets our inclusion criteria (full guideline, simplified summary). And take a look at this cautionary tale; this person is already four or five steps along that path, which is why you can no longer create an article for him directly in the main namespace. —Cryptic 14:57, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A clarification to WP:UP/RFC2016 § B4 has been proposed. You participated in that discussion; your input is welcome at Wikipedia:User pages/RfC for stale drafts policy restructuring/B4 clarification. Thanks, — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 15:45, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FYI [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Legacypac (talk • contribs) 19:36, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for bypassing you initially . Wasn’t aware that I needed to ask you first but I obviously read the instructions wrong. I filed a request to have the page Lil Pump unprotected so I could move a draft I created. I know that someone else had created a different draft and also see they made the same request above. I believe the concern on that draft is notability. Subject does meet WP:NMUSIC as there are reliable sources and charted songs. I think the only concern there in my opinion would be the page turning into WP:FANCRUFT or promotional. I will keep the page on my watchlist so that I can help keep that from happening. I would actually prefer to unprotect and move the draft I created, not the draft referenced by the user in the section above, as it is cleaner and uses reliable sources while showing the charted songs that establish the notability. Can you review my request here and let me know? Thanks.--DoubleuWW (talk) 00:15, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at RFPP. —Cryptic 20:28, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother you again, but this is getting frustrating for me so hopefully you can steer me in the right direction. I have created numerous pages for notable artists but this one I cannot because of others who have tried to spam Wikipedia. At your suggestion, I submitted to articles for creation and it still has not been reviewed. Since that time, I see the creation of a an Italian Wikipedia page for the artist (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lil_Pump) and more significant coverage of the subject continues to come up every day. It's now my personal goal to get this live as I feel like I am being lumped into a group of bad editors when I am actually a good contributor to the site. If you can please unlock the page so I can move it the main space I would appreciate it. If others feel that it is not notable, they can go through the normal articles for deletion process, although I doubt that will be an issue as the artist is notable. Sorry to vent, I am just feeling frustrated with the whole process. --DoubleuWW (talk) 04:32, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really not qualified to assess articles about musicians, unless they're as bad as the ones that originally got the title protected. The last thing I want to do is move it into mainspace just to have it get deleted again by someone who knows what they're doing in this subject area. Draft:Lil Pump (2) is objectively better than the submitted and resubmitted and reresubmitted version at Draft:Lil Pump, though. @Robert McClenon: I don't suppose you'd be willing to take a look at it again on that basis? —Cryptic 18:11, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Someone left a note on the draft saying "A Wiki is not a reliable source and most of the other sources are also not reliable." I am not going to bother to leave them a message as it appears they don't edit Wikipedia that often - I also don't see how they would be more qualified to assess notability than I would be seems how I edit Wikipedia in the music genre. At this point, I am not sure how you are unqualified to assess the article - If you compare WP:NMUSIC to the article, you will see he has charted and has significant coverage in reliable sources, including The New York Times. In fact, I am qualified to assess the article but I feel like I am being made to jump through hoops that I shouldn't have to. I have done nothing but make good contributions on Wikipedia, but please let me know if I am not welcome and I will gladly walk away. Sorry to vent, but I feel at this point that I am not part of the community and being treated like a second class editor.--DoubleuWW (talk) 02:21, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a request to review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nestaway since the organization should now meet the notability criteria for WP:ORG and WP:ORGDEPTH with recent in-depth news links in independent articles. There are bylined news articles written by staff writers and not only press releases. The references that do meet the guidelines as per my understanding are mentioned below:
References

• "Comeback Kid Award: For the founders of Nestaway, it's about trying and retrying". The Economic Times. Authors: ETBureau.
• "‘NestAway’ comes in handy for bachelors". Telangana Today.
• "Renting houses made easier". The Hans India.
• "NestAway: Helping you rent a home". ET Now.
• "NestAway: Reshaping online realty, one brick at a time". The Economic Times. Author: Anu Thomas.
• "How young startup NestAway is creating marketplace for shared home rentals". The Economic Times. Author: Jyoti Pande Lavakare.
• "Indian home rental platform NestAway gets $30M led by Tiger Global". TechCrunch. Author: Catherine Shu.
• "How Nestaway is helping millennials find a PG accommodation". Moneycontrol.com. Author: Anjali Singh.
• "Term Sheet". Fortune (magazine)
• "Nestaway, 'Managed Home Rental' Player". The New Indian Express. Author: Praveen Bose.
• "Meet NestAway- One of the Fastest Growing ‘’Online Home Rental Network’’ in India". Businessworld. Author: Saumya Gupta

Kindly review all the references thoroughly because most of them are not mere announcements or press releases, they are about the brand. RajkGuj (talk) 16:36, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some of these were in the article; some were discussed in its afd. Having a byline by a staff writer (and no, I didn't need the patronizing links to our articles on those concepts) is not evidence of reliability or effective editorial oversight - the first three articles you list substantially reproduce the same press release. The remainder are either passing mentions or routine coverage of the startup as a startup, which don't meet WP:CORPDEPTH. So I think the G4 deletion of your article at NestAway was valid. WP:Deletion review is, as you seem aware, your avenue of appeal. —Cryptic 14:16, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.

The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.

To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.

We really appreciate your input!

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cryptic, thank you for your questions and comments at my RfA. Cheers, ansh666 22:39, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of days ago I informed Legacypac that he edited a comment of mine after the discussion was formally closed. He didn't know what I was talking about, and before I got the chance to show him the diff, he deleted another editor's comment off of my talk page. I think he needs that block you offered so he'll desist from repeating this in the future. Bright☀ 05:31, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Had no idea what he was talking about, and he did not provide a diff though he accused me on my talk page and posted nastiness on the talkpage of an editor with a 3 year grudge. User:BeyondMyKen does not deserve to have his name in an ANi header with a false allegation and I don't deserve to be trolled like this. Hope this boomerangs on BrightR. Legacypac (talk) 05:47, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

With respect, no one is "trolling" you. You have been repeatedly, politely asked - over a period of years (see catalog, here: [2]) - to stop editing and deleting other editors talk page comments. You've been warned by admins on three separate occasions, on top of it. Far from stopping, you've actually started deleting editors comments in which they complain about you deleting their comments [3]. Once again, we kindly ask you please do not edit our talk page comments. If you find material posted to a Talk page objectionable or a possible violation of policy, the best course of action is to bring it up at ANI, or notify an Oversighter who can strike it if warranted. This procedure has been previously explained to you on multiple occasions, I believe? Thank you. DocumentError (talk) 20:47, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have not interacted with DocumentError for about 3 years until they tried to turn Rubin's ArbComm case into an opportunity to attack me. [4] for context. Legacypac (talk) 21:35, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Again, no one is trying to "troll" or "attack" you. We just want you to stop editing and deleting our Talk page comments. It's very disruptive. If you feel attacked, you should bring it to the attention of ANI, so the offending parties can be dealt with - not just start editing others comments. I feel like this has been explained to you many, many times? Thank you. DocumentError (talk) 23:36, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Legacypac: whatever you deserve, don't edit other people's comments. Bright☀ 13:47, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to have time free to look into this properly in a timely fashion. (Plus, I have a content dispute with him showing up in my last 50 edits.) Take it to WP:AN if you still think it needs administrator action. —Cryptic 20:37, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

===> Hi Cryptic. You Deleted a page that I wrote (A+ World Academy). Could you please give me some feedback on what changes that should be made exactly so that it can be reopened. It can easily be stripped down to just a factual page describing the special school.

How can I provide required disclosure? 23:05, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

I've added the disclosure. Please review my page and publish it. 18:16, 1 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Org100h (talk • contribs)

Dear Cryptic, I created the Truce Sport article, and you deleted it. I would really appreciate it if you provide me with the reason why you deleted it. I would like to express my sincere opinion, that Truce Sport works as an organization to bring awareness on th eglobal sport system. It is not a company that makes profit. If the policies of Wikipedia requires to mention that Truce is a non-profit, I will, as its not receiving or providing any type of compensation. It is not an advertising. Hope to hear from you soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stavros Triandafylides (talk • contribs) 15:03, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you know that I deleted it, you know the reason I deleted it, to wit, "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion". There is literally no way to coax Wikipedia into showing you one of these pieces of information without the other.

Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia written by volunteers. It is not a free web host for advertising copy about organizations you founded. You would be aware of this had you spent even a minimal amount of time familiarizing yourself with it before, or even following either of the two links in my deletion summary after, attempting to abuse it as such. If you are willing to write about topics to which you are not directly connected, you are welcome to do so. Otherwise, your time here is likely to be short and unpleasant.

Your route of appeal is Wikipedia:Deletion review. Before taking it there, you should first read the entirety of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. —Cryptic 15:40, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm C𝒪uba. On my talk page, you left a message saying that I can edit my sandbox. The problem is: My sandbox was blacklisted and has been restricted to administrators.C𝒪uba (talk) 19:05, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@C𝒪uba: You're able to edit WP:SANDBOX. Beyond that, I'm unsympathetic. Part of the reason for a user name is to facilitate communication with other users. Having an untypeable glyph in your username works directly counter to that. Please pick a username that consists only of ASCII characters, or at least glyphs used in actual human languages. —Cryptic 19:18, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	The Technical Barnstar
	This long-overdue barnstar is to say thanks for your ongoing help for people with questions at WP:VPT. Thank you for making Wikipedia a wonderful place. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:01, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry about messing up. Thanks. Vikom (talk) 09:02, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I just wanted to create an article on wikipedia, but it says that, it has already published before and if I want to recreate again, instead of creating, straight I would like to contact you first of all. I just want to know why it was deleted?. This is what is says whenever I try to recreate it - If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the user(s) who performed the action(s) listed below. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suzanese (talk • contribs) 20:59, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Suzanese: The previous contents, not even a full sentence long, stated only that he was an "upcoming artist". The inclusion criteria for musicians are at WP:NMUSIC; the article not only didn't show that this person met them, it didn't say anything to imply that he might. —Cryptic 02:45, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I see now that the more natural title at Mayestron was protected from creation due to abuse, hence the unnecessary disambiguator (musician); and that it was repeatedly created by a banned user. I therefore advise you not to create the article directly, an instead to submit a draft article through the WP:AFC process. ​ —Cryptic 02:50, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[5] title created just yesterday is an ill advised page move that was promptly reversed. It's a misleading redirect. Legacypac (talk) 07:57, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. I'll admit I misread the page history - I'd thought this was the original title of the article - but how is it misleading? Is there a national party of the same name? —Cryptic 08:02, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Conservative Party of Canada is not officially affiliated with UCP in Alberta but it came out of a from a "Unite the Right" movement. The New Democratic Party is a single party federally and in the provinces - but is styled as Alberta (or whereever) NDP. The Liberal Party of Canada]] has separately incoprorated provincial wings, but in BC the Liberal Party of BC is NOT related to the federal party (it's more a Conservative party that includes federal Liberals ). Given how parties work in Canada tagging (Canada) on the end of a provincial party is very weird and misleading. Legacypac (talk) 08:20, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You've established that it's a misnomer, but not an implausible one. This is where'd I'd move the article if it genuinely needed a disambiguator, and also, I suspect, where just about anyone else unfamiliar with Canadian politics would. This isn't the kind of clear-cut case that R3 was created for, and the dab page in the history here doesn't help matters either. RFD is the right call; spending a week there with a prominent "this redirect is likely to be deleted" tag stuck to it isn't going to cause substantial harm. —Cryptic 08:33, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Bishwo Gautam · ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) · [revisions]

please undelete this. I will edit and make it comply with wikipedia rules., I researched and wrote this article taking 9 hours today and found out that there was another one which was delete few days ago.please let meme edit it please. I have put too much effort in it — Ktmstreetrider (talk) 18:54, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to restore this article. It would have been deletable on sight solely for its promotional language, even without the afd on the same subject. Your route of appeal is WP:Deletion review.

Other than that, you might be able to convince someone at WP:REFUND to email you the text of the article, if you pledge not to put it into mainspace yourself (and you enable email at Special:Preferences). —Cryptic 19:21, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Cryptic, I just populated that redirect's talk page as you were deleting it  :) so this is now a G8 too. Sorry about that! >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 20:41, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 09:14, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I was trying to create a grid of stub types as an easy personal reference while stubbing. I'm going to recreate the page now with a more descriptive name to avoid future confusion. Thanks. I see I didn't put it in user space, I'll make sure of that as well. Alacrity25 (talk) 22:13, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, could you please tell me what changes need to be included? I thought explaining why the author was important and the impact his novels have would be sufficient. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A2061 (talk • contribs) 23:56, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You did neither of those things, instead just including external links to the books' websites. In any event, the inclusion criteria are listed at WP:BIO; your article neither satisfied them nor contained anything that so much as implied that further research would enable the article to satisfy them. —Cryptic 00:05, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

02:06, 1 February 2018 Cryptic (talk | contribs) deleted page Draft:Deepak Kalal (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement: https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/deepak-kalal-social-media-star-kashmir-valley-pune-maharashtra-modi-1080611-2017-11-06)

As you have deleted/declined the above draft, I am here to request a manual review. Deepak Kalal is a comedian, millions of people watch him daily on social media. You can see about him in many top news channel's website like India Today, ABP News and many more. I am a youtuber and i have seen that many people search Deepak Kalal Wiki and there are no wikipedia biography till today about Deepak Kalal. This draft was about deepak kalal and the user who started it was not aware about how to write the wikipedia biography in a proper way. So please rearrange it and get details about Deepak kalal via the references i the draft.

Please create a biography article of Deepak Kalal — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.149.45.16 (talk) 11:06, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is no amount of "rearranging" that can make a copyright infringement non-infringing. Besides which, it was a promotional fluff piece, not an encyclopedia article. And I certainly am not going to write the article for you. The other references in the draft were [6] and [7], if you want to try, but none of these were the sort of substantial, reliable, independent sources that we require in our inclusion criteria. —Cryptic 15:59, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I am an owner of the BizWest publication and company featured on Wikipedia. I was wondering whether/how someone connected with a company could suggest an addition or two. I only recently became aware that an entry for our publication existed, and I'm unsure of the rules, guidelines and process for recommending any additions. Nothing in the post is inaccurate, but some additional information might be valuable. Thank you for your help, and I apologize if this is not the correct forum!

Marsonaut (talk) 17:07, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Marsonaut thanks for your interest in accuracy. Go to BizWest and post your comments in the talkpage. I'll work with you to correct the page. Legacypac (talk) 17:19, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Marsonaut: The short version: editing the article yourself isn't forbidden but is very strongly discouraged; you may make suggestions at Talk:BizWest; and you must be transparent about your conflict of interest. (Thank you for being so here.)

The long version is detailed in our wmf:Terms of Use (specifically §4.7) and Conflict-of-Interest policy. There's a slightly less excruciatingly-verbose summary of the latter at WP:PSCOI. You should read through at least that and our terms of use. —Cryptic 17:35, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both! Again, no issues with accuracy, just some possible additions. I'll do so on the BizWest talkpage.

Marsonaut (talk) 19:31, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete his article? He's notable for being on Visual Concepts! Maude~Duggel (talk) 15:40, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Then you'll have no problem providing independent, reliable, in-depth sources that show he meets our inclusion criteria. Meanwhile, your article asserted nothing except that he's a guy with a job. —Cryptic 16:18, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're dissing my favorite assistant project manager of all time, moron! Please put it back! Please put it back! Maude~Duggel (talk) 12:26, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cryptic, I just can't understand why the page is getting deleted. I have provided all the required genuine references for the information mentioned on that page. Can you please help recover that page. Rohit Shelatkar is an Indian film Producer & Distributor and recently producing a film name Panipat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panipat_(film) Here also you can find his name is mentioned as Producer. Shaddycrook (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:33, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. This content was repeatedly found inappropriate, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rohit Shelatkar and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rohit Shelatkar (2nd nomination). You don't get a veto over that just so you can get a paycheck. Your route of appeal is Wikipedia:Deletion review. —Cryptic 14:36, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please recover my page. I can fix it, this is for a school assignment. I am not making a real wiki page.ChayByron 23:23, 23 April 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheralbyron (talk • contribs)

Then I would advise not submitting it to a real wiki. —Cryptic 00:06, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Cheralbyron: I have to agree with Cryptic here. You were told repeatedly that your submission was not up to article standards. I even moved it to Draft: space so you could work on it and have the work to show your instructor. You should not be surprised, then, when you moved the article back to main space again, that it was speedy deleted—just like you had been warned twice before would happen. —C.Fred (talk) 01:25, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to revoke talk page access ... block evasion.--Cahk (talk) 07:29, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Already dealt with, it seems, but thanks for the heads-up. —Cryptic 07:45, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also being falsely accused by vandalizing editors - can you help me? - 100.14.103.84 (talk) 03:03, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You've got neither contributions nor context, so no, I quite literally can't. —Cryptic 10:46, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! I was wondering if you might be willing to undelete a page I recently tagged for speedy deletion under CSD G4, User:Rpmasson/hybrid-core. The reason is that the relevant AfD was closed as an ambiguously-consensual merge to Heterogenous computing, which was deleted a year later as a copyright violation. The latter was eventually recreated without the merged content. A Google search indicates the topic is probably notable as a stand-alone article (and I'll defend it at AfD if it goes there again). I would like to compare the draft to what is currently saved in the redirect's page history and merge them if they are dissimilar, or request a histmerge if they're identical. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 17:34, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's identical to this revision except that it didn't have the last paragraph mentioning the HC-1, which is why I honored the G4 despite being in userspace. I'll perform the history merge if you restore the article and inform me of it; otherwise, do you still need it undeleted? (I probably won't take action for eight or nine hours, though; you caught me literally as I was on my way out the door.) —Cryptic 17:44, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I have restored the article without that unnecessary last paragraph. Please perform the history merge at your earliest convenience. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 23:31, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I noticed you deleted Draft:Laurelton Fire Company No.1. However, I thought there might have been some potential there. Could you restore? Thanks, Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 22:41, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It consisted entirely of a slogan, a link to www.facebook.com/LaureltonFire, and the google search link you added. Maybe there's some potential for the subject, but what was in the draft will be of exactly zero help in realizing it.

If you really want it, enable an email address and I'll be willing to mail it to you. —Cryptic 23:07, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not worth it then. Thanks, Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 05:02, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted a speedy deletion tag, A7,I put on this article ... It is not that I want the article deleted, but there are 2 things wrong. 1, the article cites NO sources. 2, there is NO evidence that this book was of particular importance to have a separate page. --Kingdamian1 (talk) 18:44, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't want a page deleted, then don't tag it for speedy deletion. The page is ineligible in any case; speedy deletion criterion A7 is strictly limited to non-fictional individual people or animals, to companies and organizations, to web content, and to organized events. Books are none of those. —Cryptic 18:48, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Honestly, there is no evidence that this book is of particular importance, or more important than other books to warrant its own page.[8] The fact that it cites 0 sources doesn't help it --Kingdamian1 (talk) 18:59, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Then redirect it or take it to afd as I suggested. (Or prod it, I suppose.) It's not a speedy deletion candidate and it's not going to get speedy deleted. Arguing about its importance or sourcing isn't going to change that. —Cryptic 19:02, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Ok. --Kingdamian1 (talk) 19:12, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See the recent changes made to {{AFD Help}}, they should be to your liking. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:18, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hii, I would like to create this article on this Company Named Novotech Australia Pty Limited (https://novotech-cro.com/) I would request your suggestion on this. Veilplot (talk) 04:30, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well. First thing you'll have to do is disclose any previous accounts you've created here as well as your connection to the company. The latter especially is mandated by local policy on the English Wikipedia and Wikimedia's terms of use.

For an article on this company to survive, it's going to need clear and convincing evidence that it passes our inclusion criteria for companies. Such evidence comes in the form of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. In particular, the press releases in the previous articles about this company weren't reliable, weren't secondary, and weren't independent.

Lastly, agents of this company have tried to get an article into Wikipedia so obviously, so poorly, and so persistently that it's been banned from creation except by administrators. You're going to need to submit a well-written draft about the company, based on proper sourcing as outlined above, and which isn't immediately deletable as promotional, through the process of Wikipedia:Deletion review to have any hope of getting that lifted. —Cryptic 23:07, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Cryptic. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 00:37, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eek. That's the second time today that I've accidentally blanked stuff while posting to a discussion. Thanks for the revert! I'll routinely view changes for now before hitting save, until I can work out what's wrong here. Firefox bug maybe. TMG^talk 18:34, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

here (noticed that page after seeing my own edits tagged with that filter here)

With my (limited, but still adequate enough for this) understanding of German, this indeed appears to be a purely promotional page which "would need to be fundamentally rewritten" to conform with policy (trans. "Bookmundo is a German self-publishing platform where authors can freely publish their books. [...]"). Since it seems you do have admin tools, that page can be deleted. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 00:35, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I considered it, and while I'm certain the intent was promotional, the google-translated version read as at least nominally neutral; and I blocked the user in any case. I deliberately tend towards caution on speedy deletion for spamminess, since my personal opinion is that admins should be using it much, much more often than we do; I'd have no objection whatsoever if some other admin deleted it. —Cryptic 00:41, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Q12. For 8 years I have been doing constant research and analysis of the questions participants ask. That, is probably the most intelligent and appropriate question I believe I have ever seen. Thank you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:10, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The sad thing is that it applies to itself, and was intended more to discourage other questions than actually get an answer. It wasn't wholly successful - Q15 in particular - but I hope it was at least partially successful. —Cryptic 20:17, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cryptic. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Nonviolence International, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 22:58, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please kindly return File:Actionfrancaise.JPG. It got deleted as an orphaned non-free file following an IP's removal of it from the article. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:34, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. —Cryptic 05:51, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Would you please be able to guide me the general guide for the consensus on Talk page? - examples : agreement of 5 users during 2 weeks period. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 01:50, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's vague and open-ended enough that any answer I could give is going to be similarly vague and open-ended, to the point of near-uselessness, and the example you give doesn't narrow it down any; so, beyond just pointing you at WP:CONSENSUS (which you've probably already read), I'll just say that I tend to treat consensus in a literal sense: if everyone consents to an action, then there's consensus for it by definition. Not everyone has to actually agree to it; there just can't be anyone who disagrees with it strongly enough to reverse it. The purpose of discussion is to convince the folks who are that strongly against your position to change their minds - if not actually agreeing with you, at least close enough to neutrality that they stop actively raising objections. Voting, as Wikipedia discussions have more and more degenerated to, is only helpful for this in that some people will voluntarily back off if they see they're in a tiny minority.

If, as is usually the case with this sort of contextless question, this is in reference to a specific situation that you're deliberately not mentioning, then please don't go back there and say "I went and asked Cryptic and he said I'm right and you're wrong, so nyaah!" —Cryptic 20:21, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have been trying to create an article titled Rusty Keeley. Please help me understand why it keeps getting deleted. Rusty is a prominent person in St Louis Missouri. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meeceplex (talk • contribs) 21:03, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your (identical, though months-apart) submissions were substantially the same as the article that was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rusty Keeley. In particular, the only secondary source you cited that included any biographical information whatsoever about this person, the sbonline.com one, was present in the previous article as well, and was specifically discussed at the AFD. Your route of appeal is Wikipedia:Deletion review. —Cryptic 16:19, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, actually i created an article with all necessary citations to the maximum extent. starting i made few mistakes which made it speedly deleted by myself unknowingly. But now everything is fine and clean. i need an administator to review my article and make it indexed on google. Draft:Vogeti Ramakrishnayya.--Rushi1122334455 (talk) 15:56, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If your goal is to manipulate Google, rather than to write an encyclopedia, your time here is likely to be short and unpleasant. —Cryptic 16:21, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

please review my draft which has all necessary citations and make it available for people.Draft:Vogeti Ramakrishnayya.--Rushi1122334455 (talk) 15:57, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've stuck a {{submit}} on it. A reviewer will get to it. This isn't a subject area with which I'm familiar. —Cryptic 16:21, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please, I hope you reconsider. The redirections of the genus Schizaphis on the pages of Schizaphis graminum, Schizaphis hypersiphonata, Schizaphis minuta and Schizaphis rotundiventris don't lead to the genus Schizaphis, as they should, but to Schizaphis graminum, which is wrong. It would be better if the link for the genus remained red until somebody created the genus page. Thanks, --Polinizador (talk) 19:44, 3 September 2018 (UTC)--Polinizador (talk) 19:44, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Take it to WP:Redirects for deletion if you feel that strongly about it. It doesn't qualify for speedy deletion. —Cryptic 20:02, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @cryptic, I tried to create a page about the company Bitrefill. However, you deleted my draft, with the reason being "(G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion; see WP:GS/CRYPTO)". I can't say that i perceive the information in that draft as advertisement or promotion. Neither do I understand why you deleted it as a page about crypto, when I've seen tons of other pages referring to cryptocurrencies. Happy to get your reply, and hopefully we can work something out with this page. Kind regards, Zacharias GrothZachegroth (talk) 09:04, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Every single sentence of the draft, without exception, was promotionally written. See WP:OSE for why your argument is unconvincing. Your route of appeal is WP:Deletion review. —Cryptic 13:06, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I'm not in the position to argue with you. However, I would like to reach an agreement on creating a page for Bitrefill. What are the chances of the page getting accepted if I were to write it completely unbiased. Just as a means of information to people searching for information about Bitrefill. I'll keep it short and concise, with no sense of it being promotional. Do you believe that there is a possibility for it to be "published", or am I completely screwed on this one? Regards, Zachegroth (talk) 11:50, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, could you send me a copy of the deleted draft by e-mail? I would like to save it for future purposes. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zachegroth (talk • contribs) 12:25, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I need help from an administrator with something that I can explain to you in my next message, can you please help me out? Davidgoodheart (talk) 01:34, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Davidgoodheart: Sorry it's taken so long to get back to you. Do you still need me? (No reply is necessary if not.) —Cryptic 22:48, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Cryptic: Hi, yes soon I will, I have been experiencing an incredible amount of frustration and today was just terrible. Thanks so much for replying to me. I message soon you soon, but first I must deal with what is going on right now in my life. Davidgoodheart (talk) 05:50, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my proposal to delete (and upmerge where necessary) the following categories: Hugo999 (talk) 01:50, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Category:2013 domestic women's association football leagues
• Category:2014 domestic women's association football leagues
• Category:2015 domestic women's association football leagues
• Category:2016 domestic women's association football leagues

I request undeletion of the BCI Society page that I wrote. The deletion occurred because it was not clear that this was an entity of significance. Since my edits last year, we organized the largest conference in the rapidly growing field of brain-computer interfaces (BCIs), which was in May 2018. It had over 400 attendees. A growing number of peer-reviewed publications have recognized our society. We are undoubtedly the "main" society for the field, with several hundred members. Please see bcisociety.org. I did not type this message just by thinking, but I could have. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bzallison (talk • contribs) 19:39, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at your parallel request at WP:REFUND, which I found while trying to track down which page you actually meant. —Cryptic 20:17, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cryptic, Thanks for move-protecting the page Max Rose (politician). Shouldn't the non-blanked version of the article be the one protected, though, since the deletion template says that the article should not be blanked or redirected during the discussion? The page looks strange the way it is...it doesn't even really seem to redirect when I visit it. Thanks, Philepitta (talk) 03:19, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, it should not, and your edit-warring there and wikilawyering at DRV got you this close →← to a lengthy block instead of just a protection. Knock it off. —Cryptic 03:23, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I only reverted the page once because I was trying to avoid editwarring, and on DRV was just replying to some points that didn't seem to follow any policy I could see. I've seen WP:WRONGVERSION before, but could you please look at the page again? It doesn't even redirect at the moment, it's just a weird mishmash of templates. Philepitta (talk) 03:26, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cryptic. There's consensus on the talk page that it's appropriate to remove the deletion review template so that the redirect goes where it should. Since you protected the article, would you please either fix it or unprotect so that someone else can fix? Thanks, Philepitta (talk) 15:21, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've been deliberately leaving the {{editprotected}} request untouched for another administrator to handle, since I commented at the deletion review. —Cryptic 15:26, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For an excellent and precise yet vivid description of past, present and future occurrences on Wikipedia. Beer on Me ! DBigXrayᗙ 19:49, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Given that several sources have just called the race for Rose, and he is now a Congressman-elect, can you please unprotect the page immediately and restore the article to avoid wasting any more time at the DRV? Thanks. Smartyllama (talk) 03:06, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not protected. —Cryptic 03:14, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, looks like it expired in the 8 minutes between my post and yours. I've restored the article in any case. Smartyllama (talk) 03:17, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I want to know why is my article Allen Career Institute, Kota deleted? Can't I create a new wiki page which was once deleted? How can my page be deleted without looking at its content? The discussion provided in the reason was of the previous page which had fault. Its my newly created page. Please review sir :(
— Preceding unsigned comment added by DarkRessels (talk • contribs) 17:05, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allen Career Institute and its endorsal at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2016 May 18. Your version was not substantially different in character to the version deleted by community consensus. That you had to write it at that title instead of the natural one at Allen Career Institute should have told you it would probably be unwelcome. —Cryptic 22:41, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Taken to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AdnanAliAfzal. -- Cabayi (talk) 18:50, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wishing Cryptic a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! PorkchopGMX (Sign your posts with four tildes!) 16:43, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 27, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 20:59, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to look at the recently created draft page of the same title (Draft:Balajichf). I don't know if it has the same content, but the content of the draft page is just someone's personal biography. I saw that you had to protect the creation of the article page, after it being deleted 4 times in two days, and thought that this might be an attempt to circumvent the deletion. --DannyS712 (talk) 11:01, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I actually found the version in the main namespace because the user had another copy in his sandbox, and that was tagged for speedy deletion. In draftspace and userspace, A) it's harmless, and B) admins aren't authorized to delete this sort of content on their sole recognizance. Not that that stops some admins from going ahead and doing so anyway. —Cryptic 11:20, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, okay. Thanks for explaining. --DannyS712 (talk) 11:38, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]