User talk:Star Mississippi

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


This page is automagically archived by a botservant. Really old archives are immediately below by year, month. 2010 and forward are in the box below.

2008:Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec, 2009: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec


AFDLand[edit]

Hello, Star Mississippi,

Did you drink a pot of coffee tonight? You sure closed a lot of AFD discussions. Wikipedia could use your help every day (or night). Liz Read! Talk! 05:14, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're most welcome. I caught the log at a good moment and I hope it makes up for when I have and am about to be offline again. The volume you process @Liz amazes me. And I know I see only a small percentage of them. Star Mississippi 20:49, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As the last blocking admin[edit]

As the blocking admin for the user, i thought to bring it to your notice that another user most definitely an UPE who has a long history of creating non-notable articles has recreated this article which you salted under another name here. Let me know if any action can be taken against the new author. Jamiebuba (talk) 23:02, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for flagging @Jamiebuba. I've blocked the "new" account. I haven't actioned the G4 as there are so many versions and my on wiki time is limited to evaluate, although I have no doubt it's a bad faith creation. Star Mississippi 01:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks for your time. I appreciate. Jamiebuba (talk) 06:24, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Any time, and it looks like @Liz handled the G4 so we should be all set. Star Mississippi 12:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah so i noticed! I have a feeling they may return. Jamiebuba (talk) 16:24, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User Doncram[edit]

I just noticed a number of 2024 User talk:Doncram talk page messages from you. Don't know if you're aware of it, but Dncram died July 9, 2023. Please see Wikipedia:Deceased Wikipedians/2023. — Maile (talk) 23:34, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Yes, thanks We've been using his Talk as a scratch pad to publish the drafts he left behind, and in some cases give him AfC credit. Do you think that should take place elsewhere? Star Mississippi 01:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see. I think you are doing it the best way. Ever since I read of Doncram's death, I've been wondering who will fill his shoes in publishing the newer listings. He was always just there, taking care of the new listings. — Maile (talk) 01:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User_talk:Doncram#List_of_drafts has his WIPs that we know of.
If there are others, or others you think he would have worked on,feel free to add. My interests interacted with his so I've picked up some but I know we're missing others. Star Mississippi 01:22, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In my case, I knew what was out there because he had already listed them. That's what I'm talking about. Who is going to keep those new listings up to date? — Maile (talk) 01:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure, but happy to try and dig into it. I'm going to be offline much of this week but will join when back. Star Mississippi 02:26, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Priyanka Choudhary[edit]

Hello Ma'am/Sir. Do you remember me? We have met several times in DRV for the review of articles of ITV actors. Sir/Ma'am we recently submitted a DRV of the actress Priyanka Choudhary and the outcome was that the previous deletions were endorsed. Sir/Ma'am what can we do so that we get a fair chance to create an article of Priyanka Choudhary in Wikipedia? We tried all possible means by maintaining WP:CIVILity and WP:good faith. We do not want to repeat the mistakes which her earlier fans made but we do wish for a fair chance. 117.209.242.154 (talk) 06:04, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! The consensus here Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Priyanka_Choudhary_(closed) is that Choudhary is not yet notable. Thank you for being civil and assuming good faith, but that doesn't overcome the issues raised with respect to WP:NACTOR and the sourcing required to pass it, which Choudhary currently lacks. It's challenging as a fan when you believe someone sh ould have coverage. In closing @S_Marshall offered an option of another project. Did you think about that?
Alternatively, you can continue working on the draft and add new sourcing and consider submitting it no sooner than next year unless sourcing changes significantly. Star Mississippi 12:50, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide my page[edit]

I worked hard on it and you’ve not advised of why it was legal to remove it. Thank you. 75.105.37.98 (talk) 19:47, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP 75. This is your only edit. Can you please give me a hint as to the article topic so I can try to track it down? Star Mississippi 02:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 2024[edit]

Hey @Star Mississippi, hope you are doing well, I would like to bring to your kind notice that deletion discussion of Isha Malviya i.e Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isha Malviya (2nd nomination) is open till now and has not been closed yet, it was opened on March 10, 2024. Kindly look into it as it has surpassed the specified time limit many days before. Thankyou .Imsaneikigai (talk) 19:00, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your note @Imsaneikigai. The discussion was closed while I was offline so this appears resolved. Star Mississippi 01:59, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like this discussion completely fell through the cracks. Open for 3 weeks and never relisted. Liz Read! Talk! 03:51, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I needed a clarity, can I open a new deletion discussion, because in my opinion the article Isha Malviya clearly fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. Since the previous deletion nomination was not listed correctly, many people did not participate and did not get a clear consensus. Thankyou Imsaneikigai (talk) 09:15, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Liz for flagging that. I hadn't looked closely. @Imsaneikigai before you do that (it would beWP:DRV), I'm pinging @Deb as closing admin for their thoughts.
@Imsaneikigai are you the same editor who raised #Priyanka Choudhary above? These articles seem somehow related and I'm not otherwise sure how you found me. Thanks all Star Mississippi 11:12, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I did notice that, but since it wasn't done properly first time round, I feel it's only right it should be possible to list it again. I'm taking note also of comments made during the latest discussion, suggesting doubtful motivation. Deb (talk) 11:15, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No i am not the one who startedthe Priyanka Choudhary conversation above. Since Priyanka Choudhary and Isha Malviya had the same career graphs, i had taken a look at deletion discussion of Priyanka Choudhary to have a gist of the reasons cited for her deletion so that it may be helpful for me to give similar reasons for deletion of Isha Malviya. There i found that IP and stalked them to reach you Imsaneikigai (talk) 11:22, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back![edit]

You were missed. I did have a question for you but two days later? I completely can't remember what it was. Life passes you by fast on this project. Liz Read! Talk! 03:48, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Not fully back yet, but getting there with a window of less travel. Hope you had a good Easter if you observe @Liz.
Feel free to leave the question for me next time. I play catch up when I return, or try. Star Mississippi 11:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you take a look at this please?[edit]

Hi again Star Mississippi; there appears to be a rather messy situation at the Jeremy Bloom article. Two brand new SPAs are persistently edit-warring to force in their preferred version against about four or five established editors who have serially contested the edits. Also note that the Fewlers account was created 17:17 on 29 March 2024 less than 20 minutes after Jeremybloomfan's last edits were reverted, which raises suspicion of sock and/or meatpuppetry. Please consider applying page blocks and/or extended-confirmed protection (the accounts appear to be auto-confirmed) or any other remedies as needed, thanks. Left guide (talk) 08:09, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for flagging @Left guide and apologies for the delay while I was offline. @EddieHugh had taken care of the out of process edits and I've E/C'ed it for a week. I'm not watching it right now and my on wiki time remains limited so please ping me if further action is needed. Star Mississippi 23:59, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Will do, thank you both for helping out! Left guide (talk) 00:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diliff at ANI[edit]

Hey, the link on the closing note to commons isn't piped properly I think. It was a closing note, hence I didn't want to change it. Can you drop by? It's missing a :commons: ig. Thanks, and welcome back :) — The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:23, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

so weird that the second one worked, but the first didn't! Thanks so much for flagging it. THank you! Hope to be fully back soon. Have a great day. Star Mississippi 19:01, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question about process[edit]

If an AfD discussion was relisted for lack of a consensus and/or lack of policy-based arguments, and subsequently a clear consensus formed, can it be closed a little before an additional 168 hours have elapsed since the relisting?

Cheers, RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 10:01, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @RadioactiveBoulevardier
Yes, a relist doesn't require a full AfD run. It can be closed when someone assesses consensus has formed. Sometimes that's soon after the relist when it catches more editors' eyes. Let me know if you need more information. Star Mississippi 14:56, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! They should make that clear on WP:Deletion process. If I have any other questions I’ll be sure to let you know.
Cheers, RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 18:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to answer any time @RadioactiveBoulevardier but I do think it's fairly clear there where it says A relisted discussion may be closed once consensus is determined, without necessarily waiting a further seven days. Do you think it sould be phrased differently? Not disagreeing, just not sure what you mean or if I'm missing something. Star Mississippi 01:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I must have missed that line. I thought I had read things thoroughly but I guess not…maybe I should get more sleep instead of indulging my Wikiholism lol RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 13:36, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

Precious
Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this, and your music posts I frequently see on my watch. I hope you're well @Gerda Arendt Star Mississippi 02:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Accidental ping[edit]

I decided NOT to say something on a talk page about that whole ... whatever it is or was ... and buried it in my sand box, but forgot to unlink you. Sorry. Feel free to read it if you like, but there is nothing there we haven't already discussed, and no action is required from you at this point. I have given up and am sorry I defended the disciplinary processes of en-wikipedia at Meta at this point, but you are not the cause of that. At all. Thanks again for all the fish. Sorry to ping for nothing, Hope your busy-ness is fun and not stressful. Elinruby (talk) 23:56, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I'll have a look at it in the coming days and see if I can be of help. I'm also not positive I don't owe you a response elsewhere.
Busy-ness is of the positive variety, thankfully. Some travel, personal obligations and a busy time at work. Plus there are days it's too nice to be indoors and online. Thanks for checking in. It's very much appreciated Star Mississippi 02:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Owe"is not the right word. I sent you email once because there was a mild privacy concern about something and I think you were a little concerned. It was ok though, used to it at this point. Just noticed today that there was a whole ANI where I was *again* misleadingly quoted, shrug. This was so unsurprising that I wasn't even notified. And JoelleJay apparently had been going through it too, since she thought he was talking about her. Another day on Wikipedia. Enjoying medieval Algeria but I really want to get it out the door now ;) All is reasonably well and weather here has eased out of omgomgomg ;) No reply was expected and definitely none owed. Next comes the lilac.
The Meta thing was SlowKing4 claiming to be some sort of tragic hero, eyeroll. Apparently administrators here insta-ban at the drop of a hat. Har har har. I begged to differ You were not mentioned in that refutation, btw. Drop of a hat, lol. Elinruby (talk) 04:31, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification[edit]

I’d like to politely point out that whilst I removed my comment, I did not apologise

Kind regards Jack4576 (talk) 01:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to amend my comment, I mistook rescind as an apology Star Mississippi 02:01, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, appreciated Jack4576 (talk) 03:56, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Star Mississippi,

I was in the process of relisting this discussion when you closed it. I found both of the editors who participated here were completely off-the-mark. There was no sockpuppet activity in this article or any previously deleted versions of it (although there has been some UPE) so I have no idea where that came from and the other editor has only 45 edits on the project. No one examined the sources provided by the article creator into the discussion. We really need some of our regular AFD participants to offer their opinion since while the nominator is fine, I have no confidence in the other editors' opinions here. I hope you might consider reverting and relisting this discussion. I rarely make this request (unless it's an NAC closure) but I think we need some fuller examination and evaluation of sources for this article. Thanks for considering this request. Liz Read! Talk! 01:48, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done and always happy to. Thanks for flagging
No harm in another week although the last relist didn't bring on any input. Star Mississippi 01:55, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The four sources I mentioned are articles and a TV documentary entirely devoted to covering the subject, so the assertions (by editors who do not read Thai) that they were mere passing mentions were plainly incorrect. The nom did not respond to my challenging of their misunderstanding, and neither of the two delete !votes addressed any of the sources I identified. I don't quite see how it could be concluded that "Consensus is sourcing is of insufficient depth". --Paul_012 (talk) 17:14, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Unfortunately it's not sufficient to assume editors' language knowledge or source access especially with access to translation tools and that your/IP 180 assessment was the arbiter of depth when other experience editors came to a different conclusion. If you believe I closed it incorrectly, you're welcome to file a deletion review and I'd welcome more eyes on it. Have a great day. Star Mississippi 18:33, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the response. Pardon the delay, but I've just started a DRV at Wikipedia:Deletion review#Sri Yala Batik. --Paul_012 (talk) 07:49, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the note, if I have anything further to add I'll do so there to keep it central. Have a great day. Star Mississippi 13:22, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it only took five months but JayCubby walked himself into the block we all saw coming (cc @Cryptic, @Girth Summit, @Espresso Addict) @Primefac not sure if it's private info or if there's anything unstale but JayCubby seemed to potentially be tied to Ladyoftrees (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)' shenanigans albeit not enough then for a non fishing SPI. Flagging if helpful. No worries if not. Star Mississippi 01:02, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saw their userpage get kicked out of Category:Indexed pages. Couldn't remember why it looked familiar. —Cryptic 07:49, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Cryptic, I saw your comment and had to look up what pages were put in this category and why. Why would an editor want Google to show their Wikipedia User pages? This seems out of order for editors to do but I guess it's their call. It just seems like an odd choice. Liz Read! Talk! 04:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It used to be a major vector for spam. Pesky new page patrollers keep deleting or draftifying your mainspace seo instead of letting google see it? Just put it on your userpage and index it there! There's even a handy button in the visual editor to teach you how to do it in one click!
Watching Category:Indexed pages used to get me about dozen g11s per day. Less of an issue after Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 153#Prevent new users from allowing search engine indexing of user pages and Special:AbuseFilter/930, though since we tied it to the wrong permission there's still an occasional problem - extendedconfirmed isn't enough by itself to make a page googlable by any other method. —Cryptic 08:12, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not happy with your close here - I think it's clearly a no consensus given my source analysis and the lack of analysis by the redirects. The fact a Somali football team is not mainstream isn't a reason for deletion. Would you please re-consider your close? SportingFlyer T·C 17:18, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @SportingFlyer. I disagree with your assessment since the sourcing wasn't shown to be independent. However, I'd be happy to relist it. Would that work for you? Otherwise please feel free to bring it to DRV. There was not a policy-based consensus to keep it per my re-read. Thanks for flagging. Star Mississippi 23:46, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I definitely showed there were more sources beyond the potentially problematic ones after the first relist, my comment was supported and not rebutted, and the whole non-independent thing doesn't really make sense here anyways - plenty of newspapers have advertised at sporting events without disqualifying their independence. That's why I'm frustrated. I'm not sure a third relist will help, but I'd prefer that to a DRV. Thanks! SportingFlyer T·C 03:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Hopefully a daytime, weekday relist will help garner input. I'm going to likely be offline when this closes. Should it not resolve as you're hoping please consider this my assent to DRV and don't wait for me to respond at that time. Have a great day Star Mississippi 13:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’d love to note here that an independent source is an independent source whether you, SF, like it or not. GNG is determined by three major facts and the relationship of a source to a subject is part of it. Whether the only source is reliable or not, as long as it is not independent of the subject, then it fails to help the subject pass GNG. There are no exceptions, not that I know of. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:26, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article you turned into a redirect after XfD close recreated(?) - Sam Williams (record producer)[edit]

Hi! Not quite sure what to do here. It looks like the redirect has been replaced with a different article. Not sure if I should leave this up or restore the redirect. It's been tagged with notability + peacock in the meantime. Schrödinger's jellyfish  05:34, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Schrödinger's jellyfish and @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: who handled while I was asleep. Guessing the new account would be found similar to Laura eley and Hari Teah but they're not overlapping and probably actually all editing on behalf of their client. Star Mississippi 11:46, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, reading here, it seems @Usedtobecool had figured out the master. Flagging the new ones if you think there's something worth filing. I don't have the history beyond the AfD. Star Mississippi 11:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the notification, SM. I don't remember much. I probably did not identify the master, may have simply been checking what they might say having noticed the socking activity in the page history. Hari Teah was pushing an older Sam and it appears to have been a simple COI as they said. Hari Teah was a collaborator of that Sam Williams[1]. The new account is an obvious UPE pushing a different topic: created an account, waited a couple days, created a userpage, made a few newcomer task edits, and jumped straight into the article with a full article in a single edit, using an edit summary intended to throw off watchers. It can be blocked as a suspected UPE and suspected sock of Smagzine based on this comparison:[2][3]. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:30, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging LilianaUwU. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:36, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That Kashisaz account is definitely a sock of Smagzine. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 19:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Usedtobecool @LilianaUwU for the background
My on wiki time is limited but Sam Williams (artist) tagged as it's a verbatim of the one at the other title, "new" editor blocked for DE since I don 't have bandwidth for SPI right now and I know it's also backlogged. Star Mississippi 12:30, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding is that Laura eley and Hari Teah wanted to write about the older Sam Williams, not the 2003 one. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
that's what I get for trying to read logs before coffee! Thanks @Gråbergs Gråa Sång and fixing ping above to @Jellyfish which the reply tool broke and I didn't catch. Star Mississippi 12:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for handling this! Responding late as I haven't been on my computer in a bit. The writing set off a few alarm bells, glad to see they didn't ring for nothing. Jellyfish (mobile) (talk) 18:28, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like an incredibly obvious case of U5; however since I’m XFD topic banned I’m afraid to even tag it for speedy deletion. I’d like to request that you speedy delete this page for me so I don’t accidentally run afoul of my editing restrictions Dronebogus (talk) 10:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! They haven't edited since 2012 or their userpage since 2010 so I don't think there's any need for action regardless of your editing restrictions.
Perhaps oversight might be needed for the email? My on wiki time is limited right now so I'm not pursuing that. If you think the U5 is needed, no objection to you asking someone else Star Mississippi 12:25, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for gentle advice[edit]

Hi Star Mississippi! I wanted to thank you for your post at ANI. I'll step back and not respond except for direct questions to me, of which I anticipate none. I also appreciate the way you phrased it as gentle advice; it made it much easier to swallow! Best, EducatedRedneck (talk) 19:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome @EducatedRedneck and apologies for the delay. It was definitely a general pointer to move the discussion forward, rather than something you'd done specifically. Star Mississippi 02:22, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Star Mississippi. I noticed you closed the above AFD on a footballer as "redirect" last month. The discussion was flawed as a quick search shows that he is indeed notable, with several in-depth stories available on Newspapers.com ([4] / [5]). One of them even mentioned the North Korean government propaganda radio station called Bong-zin as being a much better player than Pele! Am I allowed to simply revert the redirect (and add sources / expand, of course), or do I have to go through some process to get it restored? BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:37, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @BeanieFan11. We don't have soft redirect, but given that was borderline soft if it had been deletion, I think this is functionally a contested PROD in that we don't need REFUND/DRV especially since you're an established editor with track record of improving articles. What's your timeline for making the edits? If today/this weekend I'd say just revert the close pointing here so no patrolling editor questions it as out of process. If longer term, I'll draftify it for you and you can move it back when you're done. No preference on my end so let me know your thoughts. Star Mississippi 17:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I probably should be able to get to it within a week. I think I'll just revert it when I'm ready and then perform the expansion. Thanks, BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense. I'm not watching the article so just ping me if you need anything from me related to it (or any other article). Have a good day. Star Mississippi 17:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you redirect an article that clearly passes GNG? SportingFlyer T·C 01:51, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @SportingFlyer. As was the case with #Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bosaso FC above, the community doesn't see these the same way you do. There were two relists without anyone else agreeing with your POV that it was notable. The Portuguese article would not pass en wiki guidelines, and it's not clear that the sourcing you identified is sufficient. I see no other way of closing the discussion. Since this has been relisted twice, I don't see the benefit in a 3rd. If you disagree with my close (vs. consensus) and would like to take this to DRV, please feel free. Star Mississippi 01:57, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not that anyone agreed or disagreed - no one even interacted with the WP:THREE sources which were presented. And there's plenty of sources available for this one - these [6] [7] [8] articles were all from the start of this year. I know AfD participation is down, and that article wasn't in the best shape, but I believe I clearly rebutted the only deletion rationale, which was that it failed WP:GNG. SportingFlyer T·C 05:07, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again @SportingFlyer. AfD participation is down, and outside of major teams the interest level in stadiums has never appeared to be particularly high. No one interacted, or even cared to weigh in but I don't think that's enough to say your rebuttal is sufficient to overcome the nom and the redirects. I would relist, but there was zero input for three weeks and I don't see that (and therefore consensus) changing. If I were !voting I'd have assessed the sources as this link is about a game being cancelled, that's not in depth coverage of the stadium, this one might be usable, but it's about the stadium in the context of the series. I can't access the 3rd. But none of them (again, caveat that I've accessed) are the depth required. Unless you want to take this to DRV (which as I said, I welcome other eyes), I think your best course is using the history and maybe merging stadium information in. A merge would have been a super vote, but that's what would have seemed sensical to me if I'd seen this as an editor and not closing admin. Star Mississippi 12:19, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It'd be easier to draftify, honestly. I don't care enough about this particular article to save it, I'm just frustrated with the state of affairs at the moment. SportingFlyer T·C 17:15, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just tagged you where I responded at length about this state of affairs. Let me know if you're going to draftify or if you'd like me to. No preference on my end. Star Mississippi 18:36, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the article? Can you tell me what the other !voters are talking about? I certainly can't tell. Srnec (talk) 19:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did. And I've re-read their input and I don't see another way to close this discussion. That there was a community unfortunately doesn't necessarily confer notability to the topic. Star Mississippi 21:23, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd still like to know what the other !voters are talking about. It is hard for me to take their statements in good faith. Srnec (talk) 00:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome to make that ask of them, or file a DRV if you believe I closed it incorrectly. Otherwise I'm not sure what further information I can provide @Srnec Star Mississippi 01:33, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for deleted article[edit]

Hi @Star Mississippi, please I want you to assist me restore Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ndifreke Ukpong to draft.

I made the same request @User:Liz talk page. please don't be angry.

Usimite (talk) 15:15, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Answered at User_talk:Liz#Request_for_deleted_article Star Mississippi 15:45, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was really hoping the redirect option would take but I guess too much mixed bag. :( What is the acceptable time frame to re-nom? S0091 (talk) 21:14, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @S0091
Given the relatively high volume of discussion, I'd say ~ three-six months. I don't know that it's a hard rule, but it's what feels right so if you disagree, feel free to do it sooner. I'd say no sooner than a month and three has the benefit of getting out of summer participation dip.
You could start a discussion as to merger on the Talk in the interim, if that's something you might find acceptable. Star Mississippi 21:26, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your advice, SM. I didn't consider the summer slump and merger might be the way to go but I'll wait a while either way. S0091 (talk) 22:47, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Summer slump has been A Thing that Liz and I have noted, although I'm not sure it's overall worse than the general decline, so we may not see it this year. I hope not, we really can't afford a further dip and still achieve consensus in how certain subjects should be covered. Star Mississippi 01:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Admin's Barnstar
Thank you for handling questions about your closures with tact. I definitely couldn't. Mach61 03:22, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!
I feel any editor asking in good faith deserves an answer. It's all a collaborative process, and I know I'm not infallible so maybe there's something I missed. Star Mississippi 12:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
11 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub National Military Union (talk) Add sources
63 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Counter-protest (talk) Add sources
156 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Laura Shigihara (talk) Add sources
27,971 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: GA Minecraft (talk) Add sources
3 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start LTL Architects (talk) Add sources
8 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: C Tanya Bonakdar Gallery (talk) Add sources
20,043 Quality: High, Assessed class: GA, Predicted class: FA Columbia University (talk) Cleanup
2,339 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (talk) Cleanup
15 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Julia Brystiger (talk) Cleanup
139,497 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Fallout (American TV series) (talk) Expand
15 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food (talk) Expand
2 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Samoa at the 2002 Commonwealth Games (talk) Expand
683 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B Media coverage of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict (talk) Unencyclopaedic
71 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C MoonScoop (talk) Unencyclopaedic
142 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C United Nations special rapporteur (talk) Unencyclopaedic
2,216 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Russ Cook (talk) Merge
738 Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: GA Saleh al-Arouri (talk) Merge
309 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: C Project Africa (talk) Merge
74 Quality: High, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: GA Pier 57 (talk) Wikify
29 Quality: High, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: GA KQTV (talk) Wikify
4 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Embassy of Sri Lanka, Tokyo (talk) Wikify
2 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Władysław Koba (talk) Orphan
2 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Stub Gershon Burstein (talk) Orphan
95 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Sonny Angel (talk) Orphan
3 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Mozambique at the 2002 Commonwealth Games (talk) Stub
13 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Jessica Rosenthal (talk) Stub
2 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Malta at the 2002 Commonwealth Games (talk) Stub
35 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: C Chang Fei (talk) Stub
16 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start De Press (talk) Stub
3 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Ghana at the 2002 Commonwealth Games (talk) Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:24, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David Carnivale[edit]

Dear Star Mississippi, This is David Carnivale.I was disappointed you deleted my article; one I was proud to have for nearly 16 years, and I ask that you reconsider. The reason you gave was insufficient sourcing. Because it is understandably improper for people to edit or change their own page, and because I never knew anyone able to do so, I was unable to make a few corrections over the years, and the article missed the change to trademark law my lawsuit brought about - again, something I myself couldn't add. As an objective administrator, you can look at the corrections and updates I've made to bring the artic le up to date, and see that I have added many links to sources that you found wanting. Law journal articles, notices of awards given 20 years ago and some newspaper articles have links that - after many years - sometimes no longer work, but I have provided many that still do. Thank you for looking into this, Sincerely yours, David Carnivale

below contains what the article had for nearly 16 years, along with some corrections, some new updated material and sources for you to review and hopefully approve:

article draft
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

David John J. Carnivale (born April 29, 1958) is an architect, preservationist, author, and artist. He was the first architect in the world to have a website (affordablehouse.com) which made its debut March 15, 1996 and which reproduced his 1996 book The Affordable House (the second book to appear cover-to-cover on the internet March 15,1996). The website was revised and simplified in 2022. The book was originally published by BookSurge.com. In 2000, David Carnivale stopped the demolition of, and subsequently restored one of the nations oldest residences, the 1678 Lakeman-Cortelyou House in New Dorp, Staten Island. In 2005, he stopped the demolition of the 1825 Seaman Cottage which was instead relocated to Richmondtown Restoration, Staten Island. Carnivale has also been active in helping a number of other notable Staten Island structures become designated as landmarks, and for his efforts has won a number of preservation awards. His architectural practice to date has produced plans to approximately 700 projects, including a planned new community and an airport, both in Tennessee, as well as residences in two dozen states and many Manhattan commercial projects. Awards Preservation League of Staten Island Awards in 2002, 2005 and 2006. The Loring McMillen Award for Restoration 2005 given by The Staten Island Historical Society.
Four Borough Neighborhood Preservation Alliances.
Neighborhood Preservation Award 2008 Historic Districts Council Grassroots Preservation Award, 2009}.
Lawsuits From 2001 to 2005, he filed lawsuits against New York State concerning a new continuing education requirement passed by the legislature but written by a special-interest group for their own financial benefit; as a pro se plaintiff his complaint was put on the 2004 docket of the U.S. Supreme Court. He did not prevail but he rewrote the suit and brought it to the New York State Court of Appeals based on NYS Constitutional protections, and the state amended the law in question to satisfy much of Mr. Carnivale's complaint. Trademark law: Acting pre se, he won a trademark infringement lawsuit brought in Delaware District Court ('Carnivale v. Staub' Civ.No.08-764-SLR) which brought the 1946 Lanham Act into the internet age by a ruling stating that minor changes to a domain name are not a protection against infringement lawsuits (the defendants had added "The" to the plaintiff's domain name for their own website). Decided by Judge Sue L. Robinson 03/31/2010.https://casetext.com/case/carnivale-v-staub-design-2 It was appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, remanded for further consideration on two points [Opinion Filed: January 4, 2012] https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2642&context=thirdcircuit_2012 ; the Delaware District Court again found in Mr. Carnivale's favor on January 7, 2013 https://www.ded.uscourts.gov/sites/ded/files/opinions/08-764.pdf , the defendants again appealed to the Third Circuit which affirmed the lower court opinion https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2548&context=thirdcircuit_2013 the defendants unsuccessfully appealed to the Supreme Court for a A Writ of Certiorari, then sought a continuation of their trademark cancellation petition made to the U.S.Patent and Trademark Trial and Appeal Board [Cancellation No. 92047553 Staub Design, LLC v. David John Carnivale].Administrative Trademark Judges. Cataldo, Wolfson, and Masiello dismissed with prejudice the defendants cancellation petition [mailed Nov.4, 2014; Filed: 02/03/2015] 187062/2015.02.03-92047553-Staub-v-David-Opinion-PTO.pdf. The defendants appealed that decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit [STAUB DESIGN, LLC v. CARNIVALE , No. 15-1306 (Fed. Cir. 2015)] https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cafc/15-1306/15-1306-2015-08-06.html which found in favor of Mr. Carnivale [Decided August 6, 2015]. Background A native Staten Islander, he was raised in Richmondtown Restoration where he spent his youth helping restore the historic village's Dutch and English colonial era buildings, and learning American architectural history from one of the founders of the restoration (and the island's first Borough Historian) Loring McMillen. Attended Susan E. Wagner High School 1972-1976; Staten Island Community College and Richmond College 1976-1978 (all on S.I.); New York Institute of Technology (Manhattan campus 1978-1980 and Old Westbury L.I. campus 1980-1982) and one semester at the American University of Rome in 1981. References Placed on U.S. Supreme Court docket 6/14/04 as number 03-10797 "David Carnivale v. New York State Department of Education" Index No.04/116780; purchased on 11/29/04" Carnivale v. State of New York et al" 1. NYS Education Law 7308 Amended effective Jan.1, 2005- L.2004, ch.706, section 1;8 NYCRR Section 69.6(b)(1),(c)(1) • Staten Island Advance. Thursday, April 16, 2009. Volume 124 Number 30,019 Page E6 "Preservation crusader to be honored citywide" by Tevah Platt. https://www.silive.com/eastshore/2009/04/staten_island_preservation_cru.html • Staten Island Advance. Friday, October 24, 2008. Page A4 "Preservationists hail the work of 2 Islanders" by Advance staff writer https://www.silive.com/southshore/2010/04/reproduction_of_historic_home.html • Staten Island Advance. Sunday, October 15, 2006. Page A9 "Veterans undaunted in quest for cemetery here" by Stephanie Slepian (re: Carnivale's cemetery plans) • Staten Island Advance. August 13, 2009 "Architectural drawings are works of art" by Advance staff writer Nicholas Rizzi https://www.silive.com/eastshore/2009/08/architectural_drawings_are_wor.html

•	 Staten Island Advance. April 29, 2010"Reproduction of historic home under construction in Great Kills" by     Sharon Cohen

https://www.silive.com/southshore/2010/04/reproduction_of_historic_home.html • Staten Island Advance. Saturday, January 8, 2005. Page A3 "No sites found for veterans' cemetery" by Diane O'Donnell (re:Carnivale's cemetery plans) • Staten Island Advance. Tuesday, March 27, 2001. Pages a1 & A8 "17th century house to stand a while longer" by Karen O'Shea (re: Lakeman house) • Staten Island Advance. Friday, December 31, 1999. Pages A15 &A18 "Hidden treasure may shine again" by Kathleen Lucadamo (re: Lakeman House) • Staten Island Advance. Thursday, March 4, 1999. Volume 113, Number 26, 564 Pages 1, D1 & D3 "Home, Home on the Web" by Karen O'Shea • Staten Island Advance. June 13, 1976. "Islander wins 7 art awards" by Advance staff writer • Red Bank Green September 4, 2015 • https://vintage.redbankgreen.com/2015/09/red-bank-no-decision-on-rayrap-plan/

•	Red Bank Green September 4, 2015

https://en-academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/11618374 https://vintage.redbankgreen.com/2015/09/red-bank-no-decision-on-rayrap-plan/

•	Red Bank Green July 30th, 2015

https://www.redbankgreen.com/2015/07/red-bank-rayrap-drops-market-from-plan/

•	Red Bank Green July 12, 2016

https://vintage.redbankgreen.com/2016/07/red-bank-rayrap-push-law-change/ • Red Bank Green December 16th, 2016 https://www.redbankgreen.com/2016/12/red-bank-rayrap-clears-first-hurdle/ • Red Bank Green August 7th, 2017

https://www.redbankgreen.com/tag/david-john-carnivale/

• Red Bank Green November 11th, 2020 https://www.redbankgreen.com/2020/11/red-bank-rayrap-azalea-seeks-extension-111120/ External links • The Affordable House • https://www.affordablehouse.com/ • Staten Island Advance • New York Institute Of Technology • https://www.redbankgreen.com/https://casetext.com/case/carnivale-v-staub-design-2https://www.finnegan.com/a/web/187062/2015.02.03-92047553-Staub-v-David-Opinion-PTO.pdfhttps://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2642&context=thirdcircuit_2012https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2548&context=thirdcircuit_2013 • 187062/2015.02.03-92047553-Staub-v-David-Opinion-PTO.pdf • https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cafc/15-1306/15-1306-2015-08-06.htmlhttps://www.ded.uscourts.gov/sites/ded/files/opinions/08-764.pdf • [Gov.info] https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-ded-1_08-cv-00764 • [Academic Dictionaries and Encyclopedias] https://en-academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/11618374 https://vintage.redbankgreen.com/2015/09/red-bank-no-decision-on-rayrap-plan/

[Wayback Machine, the Internet Archive, Jan.15,1998 for www.intechnet.com/house which was the original address, until 2005, for The Affordable House] http://web.archive.org/web/19980101000000*/www.intechnet.com/house The Archive copied the website www.affordablehouse.com 411times between November 11, 1998 and April 1, 2024.

2603:7000:6E3B:C199:3551:7BB6:1E3:C4EA (talk) 01:34, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David, I deleted this per the community consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Carnivale and that consensus was fairly strong.
While I am willing to restore the sources you provided to to draftspace Talk, I would recommend that if I do so - you don't edit it. It's hard for anyone to take a neutral perspective on their career and to get the tone right for an encyclopedia vs. writing a biography or profile. I think the best course of action is to start from scratch and only cover that has been includes in independent reliable sources. So this would not include your website, those of the schools you attended. Sources like the Staten Island Advance might work. What do you think of that course of action? Star Mississippi 01:50, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wow you are fast; I just wrote to you within the hour! Of course I shouldn't edit anything about me - and I didn't for 15-16 years and never looked for anyone who could. I made some corrections of misinformation and added new material that has importance in legal circles about how my lawsuit changed trademark law- and sent it to you because only you can judge it and only you can check the may additional sources I gave and decide whether to restore the page.Thanks to Wikipedia, Architects (unlike the other professions) could discove the first architectural website and learn who was the first member of their profession in the internet;15,000 New York State could find out who waged a long court battle that removed an onerous burden place on them by a special-interest organization who managed to slip a piece of legislation through one evening in the state capital requiring them to join a particular private organization or suffer consequences and lawyers had a record of my lawsuit that protects everyone's domain name and altered the way federal courts interpret trademark law. I respectfully suggest that all these things are important and worth making a record of. Of course, as you say, I cannot be neutral- naturally, but each of these things are documented and some are part of the early history of the internet. I realize no one cares whether I went to the University of Rome or not and couldn't care less about where I went to high school - but the things I've mentioned have a larger significance- affecting all domain name owners and many thousands of architects. As far as the book and website- I am at the very end of my career and am not even accepting new clients - so while I was very proud that Wikipedia had an article mentioning them, I no longer gain anything beneficial from it (and am not that sure I ever did, really). I hope you choose to restore the actual article; Wikipedia is a more complete work with it than without it. Thanks for your rapid attention to my note - very impressive speed! Sincerely yours, David Carnivale 2603:7000:6E3B:C199:3551:7BB6:1E3:C4EA (talk) 02:47, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Apologies for the short answer as I just have a couple of minutes. Thank you for more of this context. While I'm not sure the trademark and lawsuits are enough, I will start the draft so folks who opined at the discussion can add material such as the article about your recognition as a preservationist. It's possible that it will move back to mainspace, but it's possible it won't. Just wanted to make you aware of that up front as well. Since I am limited in my time right now due to work and some upcoming travel, I will put it through WP:AFC (or another editor may if they get to it first, or choose to move it directly). Thanks again for the sourcing information. Star Mississippi 13:15, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]