User talk:CactusWriter

Welcome! If you need help with something, feel free to ask. To leave a message for me, press the "new section" tab at the top of the page. Remember to sign your message with ~~~~. I will respond to all civil messages. If you are requesting administrative help and I am not currently active, here are some other options for you: If you need to get a repeat vandal blocked, report them to Administrator Intervention against Vandalism. If you need a page to be protected from editing, use Requests for page protection. If you would like to request rollback rights or account creator rights, ask at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions. If your problem does not fit into any of the above criteria, and your issue is urgent, make a post on the Administrators' noticeboard, the Incidents noticeboard, or one of the other noticeboards. If you want to ask for help, you can ask at the help desk for questions about Wikipedia, and at the reference desk for more general questions. You may also simply ask a question on your talk page and add {{helpme}} before your question. This will attract the attention of experienced users who will most likely be able to help you. Administrators, if you see that I've made a mistake, please fix it. I will not consider it wheel-warring if you reverse my admin actions, however I do expect you to leave a message here explaining your reasons.

edit count | edit summary usage

Archives

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020-21 2022-23 2024

Coat of arms (heraldy crown)

Hi CactusWriter. I've already mentioned issues with the article/editor to Drmies, but the editor creating Coat of arms (heraldy crown) has just re-created it again following your most recent deletion. That's the third time it'd been deleted today, I think, and it's also been moved to draft space. Anything you can do? I can tag for speedy deletion, again, but I think they'll just re-create it. They're not responding on their talk page. Cheers, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 23:45, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Bastun, I've deleted the article (again) and given the user a short block. Perhaps this will prod them to begin talking rather than continue with disruptive edits. Good luck. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 23:50, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Cheers, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 23:51, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Reason

When the conversation about an article is going on, the reason to delete that article in a hurry??--Gowtham Sampath (talk) 17:42, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

My question has not yet been answered. Why??? ---Gowtham Sampath (talk) 00:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Gowtham Sampath. I will assume your question concerns the article Periyababusamudram. It was speedy deleted per WP:G12 as an unambiguous copyright infringement of a copyrighted page. This is a legal issue for Wikipedia. For legal reasons, text or images that are currently copyrighted elsewhere must be removed immediately. I see that you have recreated the article without the copyrighted text. Please remember that it is always best practice to create text from scratch rather than copy-pasting from outside sources. If you have further questions, please ask. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 01:48, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Contents of a deleted article

Last month, you deleted Draft:Guyana Campaign per G3. The Guyana Campaign under Bolívar was very real, which makes me wonder what exactly the hoax article stated. Any clarity here would be much appreciated. - Mebigrouxboy (talk) 16:42, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Mebigrouxboy. That draft was deleted multiple times (both in draft space and main space) when editors found that "no evidence that this existed, let alone that the things written here are true or verifiable." Please note that the article you link to in Spanish Wikipedia was a military campaign in 1816-1817. The hoax article was an alleged campaign in 1714. Let me know if you need further clarification. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 22:08, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

It seems like it had something to do with Dutch history, given the pages that link to it. Is that accurate? - Mebigrouxboy (talk) 22:41, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes. It described a confrontation between Portuguese, Dutch and French armies. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 22:49, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! - Mebigrouxboy (talk) 03:56, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Why did you delete https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_hoaxes_on_Wikipedia/Ruda_Real?

Your explanation at the page didn’t make any sense. If you don’t think this constitutes a hoax please let MfD decide, don’t perform an illegitimate speedy deletion. Dronebogus (talk) 08:49, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Dronebogus, it probably would have been helpful if I had linked to the AN page. My larger explanation was given at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard where a request was made to delete the unused page. The page had been removed from WP:LOHOW for more than a year-and-a-half (since October 2022) without any controversy and remained unlinked to anywhere on WP other than talk pages. It was deleted again -- as it originally had been per AFD consensus. The current re-deletion is not illegitimate. Can you provide a further reason for keeping this unused page? — CactusWriter ^(talk) 20:37, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

I thought it was kind of up in the air whether Ruda Real was a real person. There’s a good possibility that if real (pun not intended) his music career was a hoax. Regardless as long as there was a legitimate reason to delete it I don’t care. Dronebogus (talk) 02:32, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

The real name for "Ruda Real," given on that page along with the birthdate, death date and places of birth and death were exact matches for a person listed in public government records including the United States Social Security Administration. The music career part may or may not have been real but the actual person was real with a real family. The article should either have been speedy deleted originally as non-notable or vandalism. In either case, it remained a violation of our WP:BIO policy. Thanks for your input. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 15:29, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Deletion review for Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia/Ruda Real

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia/Ruda Real. 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. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:28, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Pppery. I've replied. And as I've always noted at the top of this talk page -- I have no issue with any administrator reversing my decisions. Cheers. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 17:01, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

 Done Page restored and new Mfd created. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 14:45, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Regarding RD1

Hi CactusWriter, just a friendly reminder to remove {{copyvio-revdel}} from a page once you clean the history, since the template populates Category:Requested RD1 redactions. Thanks for helping to reduce the backlog. ^Complex/_Rational 00:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Whoops! Thanks for the reminder. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 01:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Signature

Just FYI, your new signature links to User:cactuswriter, which doesn't exist as a page. Elli (talk | contribs) 21:56, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Been futzing around with my sig -- thanks for the heads-up. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 01:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

AFDs

Hello, CactusWriter,

Thank you for your help closing AFD deletion discussions today. We always need more admins rotating in to spend some time assessing these discussions. However, please come familiar with Wikipedia:XFDcloser and use it to close discussions. It's what all other closers and relisters use and it's a really simple-to-use editing tool. I know you are not using it now because you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of NX Files characters and the result was 22 broken redirect pages along with their talk pages. I needed to delete them all individually.

If you close an AFD with XFDcloser, then this awesome tool will not only delete the article, its talk page and all redirects to the deleted article (and their talk pages) but it will also remove any red links that are left over from the deletion of the article. It's really standard practice and it will make the process so much easier for you than handling each AFD discussion closure yourself, manually. Just a suggestion that might save you some time and worry. Thanks again for your help. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Liz. As can be seen on my contributions, I had already used XFDcloser on all my other AFD closes today. And you're right, it certainly does simplify the process -- not like the old days of tedious manual closes. Sorry about any broken redirects. Appreciate your help. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 22:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Brittani Louise Taylor - University

I am so sorry… that was such a bonehead mistake. Thank you for fixing it! 4theloveofallthings (talk) 22:57, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

	The Special Barnstar
	For taking the time to go through the sources and find my giant goof on the Brittani Louise Taylor article. 4theloveofallthings (talk) 23:00, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. No worries. It is a common mistake and easy enough to fix. Cheers! — CactusWriter ^(talk) 15:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vecteezy (2nd nomination)

Just a heads up, this AfD was started by a now-blocked sock, so you may want to reconsider the close – maybe a relist while striking their comments? Cheers, Number 57 00:45, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I just came to post about the same AFD. I was looking at some recent AFDs created by a sockpuppet and came across this one. I'm not sure how you came to a Delete decision here. It doesn't seem to be the consensus point of view of the participants. Thanks for any explanation you can offer. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that one required some careful reading of the participants' discussion points since a couple of them argued against their own "keep"s. The nominator (who was not identified as a sock at close) wanted to delete based on NCORP. Oaktree voted! delete based on it being a PR piece without RS. Teratix voted! keep feeling two sources were RS (although one was shown to be a blog) but they also wanted a complete rewrite (which might be considered a TNT vote!) The next two, Chekidalum and X, said the article passed NCORP. However, X also suggested the article should never have been put in mainspace.(Essentially a draftify or TNT vote!) HighKing wrote Keep but then argued that the article failed NCORP and needed to be deleted unless completely rewritten as a different topic. IMO, the majority consensus based on editors' arguments was the article should be removed for failing NCORP and/or needing a complete rewrite. I probably should have added a line about welcoming draftify requests from anyone.

It was definitely an "interpretive" decision based on the discussion points -- and knowing their was no chance to relist for further discussion. I have no problem if either of you wants to reverse my decision and re-open the AFD for a fourth relist or to even change my close. Just let me know. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 21:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Number 57, on re-assessment, I now see that the article clearly was recreated by a sock, too. (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/WikiAddict81/Archive about the original Vecteezy article creator) Account is blocked and reported to SPI. It should have been a WP:G5 from the get-go. Thanks for the heads-up on the sock. Do you think I should edit the AFD or redo the deletion to reflect that? — CactusWriter ^(talk) 14:32, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Looking for help

Hi you were listed as the contact for admin removal of my recently submitted page: Alley of the Dolls (band). This is my first time creating a new page so I apologize for any noob mistakes in creating but it seemed like I had answered every question brought up by other admins and contributors and supplied literally dozens of references and got nowhere. This is a band I have a lot of knowledge of, and I am really passionate about getting live on Wiki. They absolutely ARE real and established albeit not currently in the hot 100! Any advise you give to restart the page from a position that wont immediately have it pulled again would be appreciated. MusicForeverYours (talk) 16:51, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @MusicForeverYours:. I have recreated the deleted article at Draft:Alley of the Dolls (band) where it can be edited for improvement. I suggest that you review the comments made at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alley of the Dolls (band) by the discussion participants (they are all veteran WP editors). And review the links to the relevant guidelines. I saw that the issue revolved around a lack of significant coverage by independent reliable sources. Please note that blogs, PR sites, marketing websites and sales websites are invalid as reliable sources. That lack of good sourcing is usual for a new band before it becomes established. Valid reliable sources take time to emerge. Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 01:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

User:Adamlampalo

User:Adamlampalo was created by a sock of an LTA, as recognized at Special:CentralAuth/Adamlampalo. Therefore, it is eligible for G5 even if it was created before the sock itself was blocked. Air on White (talk) 00:24, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay. Here's the actual link that mentions the LTA at [1]. It's probably helpful to point to that link in your edit summary when G5 tagging an account blocked for WP:NOTHERE or vandalism, etc. Cheers! — CactusWriter ^(talk) 16:21, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2024).

Administrator changes

Graham Beards

• Deskana
• Mets501
• Staxringold

Bureaucrat changes

• Deskana
• Warofdreams

Oversight changes

Dreamy Jazz

Guideline and policy news

• Phase II of the 2024 RfA review has commenced to improve and refine the proposals passed in Phase I.

Technical news

• The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Venezuelan politics has been closed.
• The Committee is seeking volunteers for various roles, including access to the conflict of interest VRT queue.

Miscellaneous

• WikiProject Reliability's unsourced statements drive is happening in June 2024 to replace {{citation needed}} tags with references! Sign up here to participate!

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:43, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Recreating TV3 Group (Baltics)

Hello - I don't know the circumstances of your previous deletion of the article TV3 Group (Baltics), but I plan to create an article with that name containing the information currently displayed at the disambiguation page Channel_3.

The content will be as follows:

TV3 Group (Baltics) is a pan-Baltic commercial broadcasting company owned by Providence Equity Partners through Bitė Group in Lithuania, previously a part of Viasat operations

• • TV3 (Estonia)
  • TV3 (Latvia)
  • TV3 (Lithuania)

If this is in any way problematic, please let me know. Thank you. Coining (talk) 12:27, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

CS1 error on Edwin L. Z'berg

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Edwin L. Z'berg, 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) 00:01, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Editor experience invitation

Hi CactusWriter :) I'm looking for experienced editors to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 22:04, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Overrided AFD to deletion

Hi @CactusWriter,

From this log, it shows you deleted the page Chef Chioma while it's undergoing a deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chef Chioma. Please undelete the page for the discussion, which is still highly going to be deleted continue (it's a formal process though). If not, undelete the page and close the discussion when due or since consensus is met. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:16, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi, SafariScribe. The AFD discussion can be closed early if the article has been concurrently deleted by Speedy Deletion -- it does not require the continued formal process. See WP:EARLY. The article was tagged properly as WP:G4 because it had been previously deleted a few weeks ago per AFD discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chioma Rowland. I concurred and deleted the article. The AFD is now closed. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 18:07, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

That was what I needed. Thanks for the closing. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 18:09, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

No problem. For future reference, know that if you had wanted, you could have closed the AFD yourself (Wp:NACD) by just mentioning my name and the reason for speedy deletion in the result. Best — CactusWriter ^(talk) 18:15, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of translations of The Lord of the Rings

Hi CactusWriter

Just wanted to raise a query your close at the AFD here. The list was split out from the associated article (now at the title Translating The Lord of the Rings. As such, the prior status quo was that the two pages were in the same location, with the prose and list both in the same place. The split was never discussed and was clearly controversial and disputed, therefore the default status quo should have been to revert to it. There were many contributors to the above discussion who favoured reverting back to that prior status quo, and I think that re-merging should have been the outcome of the discussion. I don't see a strong consensus for retaining the split specifically, there was no consensus in participants on that question, and many editors were simply commenting on the notability of such a list overall rather than the merits of a split. Please could you revisit the close? Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 10:19, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Amakuru. I'll be happy to review my close of that discussion with you. First, the AFD was based solely on an alleged lack of notability of the list to exist on its own as a "stand-alone list" (WP:LISTN). Therefore the vast majority of the discussion addressed that issue -- with most participants "commenting on the notability" -- as one would expect for a discussion about notability. In the end, the argument "to keep" certainly outweighed the argument "to delete." As noted in my close, a merge was suggested by several of the participants, including two editors giving it as a second option after their "keep" positions. (And one editor oddly being indifferent as to either deleting or merging.) Which tipped the scales of the close on the side of keeping the stand-alone list. Only three editors spoke to merging "back," with one of them mentioning an undiscussed split. However, there was no evidence that it was "clearly controversial and disputed" as you suggest -- especially since the consensus showed that the editors were fine with a stand-alone list. If you believe the original split was controversial, and it needs to be discussed, is there any reason that you can't create a discussion for that purpose now? — CactusWriter ^(talk) 01:07, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2024).

Administrator changes

• Elli
• HouseBlaster
• Pickersgill-Cunliffe

• Brianga
• De728631
• Georgewilliamherbert
• Hyacinth (deceased)
• ProveIt
• The Night Watch

Technical news

• Local administrators can now add new links to the bottom of the site Tools menu without using JavaScript. Documentation is available on MediaWiki. (T6086)

Miscellaneous

• The Community Wishlist is re-opening on 15 July 2024. Read more

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:58, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Please compare a new page to a G5-deleted page

Hello CactusWriter. Aleksandar Sasha Trajkovski was recently created. Previously, there were deletions of Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski, and one of them was yours -- a G5 (log). The impetus to create pages on these topics on Wikipedia comes from a promotional scheme described in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1149#Promoter generates online coverage in real time. The Мкдвики account was globally locked. An SPI had found socks. The new Trajkovski article is not identical to Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski which is where the problem was detected at the time, but all of the references seem the same, from memory (a subset is included), the content is similar, and I think that this, together with evident WP:GAMENAME (Saša/Sasha) passes the duck test. Sincerely —Alalch E. 11:19, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello Alalch E. I agree. A comparison of the new article with the previous pages shows duplicated language. Because it was created by an SPA account, I've blocked the account on the WP:DUCK behavior and filed an SPI report. After a clerk has reviewed and filed the report, the page can be speedy deleted as a G5. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 19:04, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Page on Musician Ben Seretan

Hello! I see that you deleted the page I began on musician Ben Seretan. I would like to republish that page and would very much appreciate your help with that. Ben Seretan is a notable musician and with greater edits, I believe this page to be beneficial to the indie rock and ambient music genres. Thanks! Thequietthunder (talk) 18:31, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello! Checking back in about this- thank you! Thequietthunder (talk) 14:45, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Thequietthunder. Per your request, the deleted page has been restored at Draft:Ben Seretan. The article in its current form requires significant improvement to remove the promotional text. After you have improved the article, you can submit it for review by experienced editors. Please note that the page may still be deleted if it does not meet requirements for a Wikipedia page. Best. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 18:20, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Great, thank you! It has been edited for clarity and accuracy and it ready for review. Thequietthunder (talk) 16:01, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2024).

Administrator changes

Isabelle Belato

• Ian.thomson
• Modussiccandi

Interface administrator changes

Izno

CheckUser changes

Barkeep49

Technical news

• Global blocks may now target accounts as well as IP's. Administrators may locally unblock when appropriate.
• Users wishing to permanently leave may now request "vanishing" via Special:GlobalVanishRequest. Processed requests will result in the user being renamed, their recovery email being removed, and their account being globally locked.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee appointed the following administrators to the conflict of interest volunteer response team: Bilby, Extraordinary Writ

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Journal of Communication & Public Relations (JCPR)

Hi, aren't all those external links promotional? --Randykitty (talk) 10:31, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Randykitty. I wavered on that one. I agree with you that almost all of the links are crap and should be tossed -- but most are just links to indices and the text wasn't exclusively promotional. The author's conversation at the help desk shows they don't understand what "references" mean. The page is borderline, can't be moved without added RS and I expect I'll be G13-ing it in about 5 months. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 17:18, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

• Looks like we're mostly on the same page then, I just have less patience... :-) Cheers, --Randykitty (talk) 18:04, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at WP:REFUND § Liverpool F.C. 2005–06 UEFA Champions League qualification

 You are invited to join the discussion at WP:REFUND § Liverpool F.C. 2005–06 UEFA Champions League qualification. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:09, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi CactusWriter. I'm just letting you know a bout this as a courtesy since you're the last admin to delete the article, FWIW, I don't think the IP who posted the request is aware that articles deleted via AfD aren't, in principle, eligible for REFUND and need to go to DR instead. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:12, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Dave Wellstone

You recently deleted an article that I spent extensive time on. I am more than happy to revise it, as I want to do it right, but I need the original source copy so I can move it to my Sandbox. Could you help me please? ~~~~ SaraJKK (talk) 16:41, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, SaraJKK. The restored article can be found now at Draft:Dave Wellstone so that it can be edited to remove any promotional or non-neutral text. I suggest that you read through Wikipedia fundamental policies on neutral point-of-view and promotional content. After you have finished editing, you can submit the article for review. Please note that if you have any personal connection with subject or their family or their work, than you must declare a conflict of interest (as outlined at WP:COI). If you have questions, feel free to ask. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 17:08, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Recreating article on ICC judge Geoffrey A. Henderson

Hi – about 10 years ago you speedy-deleted an article on Geoffrey A. Henderson. This was about a year after the International Criminal Court judge by that name took office, so I’m assuming the article was about him. At that time he had just begun presiding over the prominent trial of Laurent Gbagbo, so there may not yet have been much coverage of him. He is now the only former ICC judge without an article in the English Wikipedia (after I created a stub about the only other one, Mauro Politi). The opinions issued in the Gbagbo case (including his) are the subject of scholarly analysis (e.g. here). It seems pretty clear to me that he’s notable – I’m just checking with you before I recreate the article because that’s what the deletion notice asks to do. Joriki (talk) 12:06, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Joriki. I see no problem with you creating an article about an International Criminal Court judge named Geoffrey A. Henderson. The original article that was speedy deleted was only one sentence and there is no indication that it was the individual about whom you are writing. Cheers. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 20:00, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024).

Administrator changes

Pppery

Interface administrator changes

Pppery

Oversighter changes

Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

• Courcelles
• GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.

Arbitration

• Following a motion, remedies 5.1 and 5.2 of World War II and the history of Jews in Poland (the topic and interaction bans on My very best wishes, respectively) were repealed.
• Remedy 3C of the German war effort case ("Cinderella157 German history topic ban") was suspended for a period of six months.
• The arbitration case Historical Elections is currently open. Proposed decision is expected by 3 September 2024 for this case.

Miscellaneous

• Editors can now enter into good article review circles, an alternative for informal quid pro quo arrangements, to have a GAN reviewed in return for reviewing a different editor's nomination.
• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in September 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,900 articles and 26,200 redirects awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:43, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Premiership of Robert Jenkinson, 2nd Earl of Liverpool

Hi CactusWriter, would you mind restoring this page to allow for continued discussion at AfD? I've discussed this with another admin, Hey man im josh, at RFU, and we both think the AfD process should be given a chance. Thanks, ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:00, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

I recognize you state that any admin can reverse an action you've made, but I feel better if it's mentioned/discussed with you first CactusWriter. I believe, based on the contributions to the article by someone other than the sock, that it probably should not have been G5'd to begin with. I think @Asilvering agreed with this given that they declined the initial G5 tag before the creator of the AfD restored the tag. Neveselbert put a decent amount of work into cleaning up the article, and I think they should be given a chance to continue to do so if they are want to. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)