This isSnowyRiver28'stalk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text.Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome!Learn to edit;get help. Assume good faith Be polite andavoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seekdispute resolution if needed

Archives (index):1Auto-archiving period:7 days

New to Wikipedia and feeling lost and overwhelmed? Check outWikipedia:Everything you need to know and let me know if you need any further help!

Hello, I really wanted to create a wikipedia page about myself. I know that sounds weird but I have many articles and independent sources. I'm running for Team USA for the upcoming Paralympic and Olympic Games and want the best chance for selection. It says it could create a conflict on interest due to submitting a Wikipedia page for review about myself. I did it anyways. I was wondering if you would mind reviewing it for me or submitting it for me instead? I have the entire markup/draft saved and can send to you with sources and citations. --Ericnhacker (talk)21:17, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Ericnhacker, welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for reaching out with your question!

You're correct that writing about youself creates aconflict of interest for you, and it seems you've already been open and transparent about this, so thanks for that!

It looks like you've already gotten some feedback on the draft and re-submitted it, the only addition I would make is to ensure the subject of the article meets Wikipedia's notability criteria. This is tricky because it's different from the ordinary english meaning of the word. To qualify for an article, a topic must either meet thegeneral notability criteria, or a subject-specific criteria (in this case, it would bethis one about track athletes).

I encourage you to read both the general notability criteria I linked above, and the track athlete-specific one too, and ensure you meet one of them. Make sure you include the sources that prove you've met the criteria in the references of the article too.

Please let me know if you have any other questions or comments, and again, welcome to Wikipedia :)SnowyRiver28(talk)23:12, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like I do meet those standards thankfully. I didnt read them ahead of time but Im glad I fit the criteria since I have won multiple U20 sanctioned races as well as been top recruitment for Team USA for the Paralympic Games. Have been featured in Runners World Magazine which is the biggest and most prestigious running magazine. And have a Ohio Senate/House Resolution Bill. I really appreciate your feedback and support! Is there any way you can assist with the review process further?Ericnhacker (talk)02:41, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as the lack ofin-line citations was the only given reason your draft was denied, and you seem to have fixed it, there's not much else to do except for waiting for it to be reviewed again.

In the meantime, you could try and condense all the duplicate references. If you're using a source you've already used earlier in the article, you can re-use the same citation. This way the references section doesn't become a big list of duplicate sources, as yours is now. SeeWP:REPEATCITE for info about this, andWP:REFNAME for more technical and in-depth instructions. Let me know if this is confusing or you need more help.

Another think you can do is go through the article and add links to other articles. For example, in the lead paragraph, you could create links toOhio,Shawnee State University etc. Note that not every word needs to be linked. ReadWP:LINKS for detailed info on this.

Let me know if you have any further questions! If you're looking for other things to do on Wikipedia while you wait, check outWP:INTRODUCTION orWP:ADVENTURESnowyRiver28(talk)03:03, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested atWikipedia:Village pump (proposals) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list ofFeedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time byremoving your name.

(replacingYapperbot)SodiumBot (botop|talk)00:31, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HelloSnowyRiver28! The thread you created at theTeahouse,Ideas for contributing on mobile, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can stillread the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, pleasecreate a new thread. See also thehelp page about the archival process.The archival was done bylowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered byKiranBOT, bothautomated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing{{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk)03:16, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions toDigdeguash River. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time becauseit needs more sources to establish notability.I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information atHelp:Unreviewed new page.When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back.SnowyRiver28(talk)04:17, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mate, it's a river, in fact it's a river with nine articles already pointing at the deadline dating back years, including a Request for Article about it - Google it if you think it's fake, but don't move a stub article to draftspace because you're not sure if the river has enough peer-reviewed studies about it. That's what a stub is. This is silly. (I'm not going to waste time arguing with you about it, I'm sure you've got all kinds of rebuttals about how the rules let you nix articles that don't show mainstream media coverage and peer-reviewed articles...meanwhile this river in Canada has an article on Filipino WP but you're not sure it has enough sources to establish it's a river in English. Insanity.Fundy Isles Historian - J (talk)04:44, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You’ve linked one reference on the article which contains the river’s coordinates and nothing else. This is actually excluded as meeting thenotability requirement that states…provided information beyond statistics and coordinates is known to exist.

I have no doubt the river is real, I simply doubt it meets the notability requirement I linked above and you’re yet to provide any sources that disprove that. Moving to draftspace is not punitive, it’s a chance for you to fix the article so it’s compliant. Simply add a reference that meets the notability requirement and you can move the article back to mainspace.SnowyRiver28(talk)05:12, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nah man, not doing it - now Wikipedia English will just lack an article on it for the next eleven years. If you wanted more sources there are lots of hatnotes you could've added instead of CSD/DS-ing it - but you chose to be a petty tyrant and double down. Now WP loses. Do it yourself if you care.Fundy Isles Historian - J (talk)05:15, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This may surprise you but providing one source (in an incorrect format) is not sufficient to establish notability for almost anything.

Wikipedia will not really 'lack an article' on the river any more than it did when the article briefly existed, because it only had 14 words, 2 of which were "Digdeguash River"Aesurias (talk)05:37, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ironically, you also could have added some sources in the time you’ve taken to argue and attack me.SnowyRiver28(talk)06:03, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah man, it's ironic - if you hadn't deleted the article it'd be a pretty nice looking article 24 hours later - guess there's a lesson in that. Improve it yourself (in the time you took to delete it), or add a hatnote asking for more sources, or leave the guy who created it to improve it, or leave others to improve it, don't rush to delete. Now we don't have one.Fundy Isles Historian - J (talk)06:06, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Who deleted it? I literally did exactly what you said I should have done. I moved it to draft to “let the guy who created it improve it, or leave others to improve it”, as you say.SnowyRiver28(talk)06:10, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thought I'd let you know.Aesurias (talk)05:34, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It seems the creator ofDraft:Hardwood Island (Saint Patrick Parish NB) recreated the article in the namespace asHardwood Island (Saint Patrick Parish NB) and improved it, instead of simply improving and moving or submitting for review the draft.SnowyRiver28(talk)05:45, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery19:32, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I really don't get what this page has to edit. It was included in my recommended edits for some reason. Can you check it out then get back to me? --Stinkyboi67mason (talk)21:04, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there @Stinkyboi67mason, welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for reaching out with your query!

It seems the articleConqueror's Blade was probably suggested to you by the tool forcopyediting, as the Gameplay section has a template stating:This section may require copy editing for Overcapitalization.

Copyediting is super important for Wikipedia, and involves correcting grammar, spelling, phrasing, readability etc. In this specific case, it seems other editors have already fixed up the issues, but they forgot to remove the{{copyedit}} template.

Let me know if you have any other questions or comments, I'm happy to help! I'd recommend checking outWP:ADVENTURE andWP:INTRODUCTION for help getting started with Wikipedia, as everything can be quite confusing at first :)SnowyRiver28(talk)01:03, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, sounds good! Thank you! :)Stinkyboi67mason (talk)20:41, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SnowyRiver28, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion ofPivot (futsal), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article differs from the previously-deleted article. Could potentially be deleted via PROD or AFD. You may wish to review theCriteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you.ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!}12:02, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies @ThadeusOfNazereth, I just assumed since the articleFutsal positions was deleted via AFD that articles about each individual futsal position would, just by logic, also qualify for a CSD.

Does this sort of inheritance not happen in practice?SnowyRiver28(talk)12:06, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No need to apologize! CSD criteria can be tricky :). To answer your question - It could happen in practice, but it would require the recreated article to be an exact recreation of that section of the deleted page. In this case, the new article has expanded that section and has addressed at least one of the reasons for deletion (lack of sourcing). Obviously, non-admins can't view deleted versions so there's some guesswork involved, which is why admins have to review before approving or declining the request.ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!}12:09, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the helpful feedback! I hadn’t considered admins being able to look at deleted content to see what’s what.

Thanks again!SnowyRiver28(talk)12:13, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, my name is Kyle. I created my account so I can add information, both about my business and about independent wrestlers that I know... I totally new to editing Wikipedia, and just want to know if you have any tips, or advice, or suggestions as to how best go about it, what to avoid, etc. Thank you for your time. --Apisstudios (talk)19:10, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there @Apisstudios, welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for reaching out!

It’s great you’re interested in contributing to Wikipedia! To start off, I’d recommend checking outWP:INTRODUCTION for a general overview of how to get started.WP:TASKCENTER lists a bunch of newcomer friendly things that are easy to get started with too.

Also note that if you’re planning to edit content relating to something you have a personal connection to, you have aconflict of interest, and you must readWP:COI and follow the directions there accordingly. This includesdisclosing your conflict.

Let me know if you have any other questions, and thanks again for your interest in contributing :)SnowyRiver28(talk)22:11, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thank you so much for the info, especially the conflict of interest info. I might've plugged headlong into catastrophe on that one if not for you lol... much appreciated. I will read those topics. thank you again!Apisstudios (talk)23:46, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SnowyRiver28. After reviewing your request, I haveenabledrollback on your account.

I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, and feel free to leave me a message on mytalk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate use of rollback. If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. For information on rollback, seeWikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin) andWikipedia:Rollback. Good luck and thanks!* Pppery *_{it has begun...}21:24, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My edit including the names of Mrinalini Sarabhai and Vikram Sarabhai has been deleted from the personal life section. Both their names feature in the side bar.Dubby1949 (talk)07:20, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there @Dubby1949! Ideally, the names shouldn't be in the body or the infobox if they're not supported by a source. You can add them back to the body if you cancite a source for them. Perhaps if you look in theMrinalini Sarabhai andVikram Sarabhai articles you might find a reference to use.SnowyRiver28(talk)07:27, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I’ve edited Wikipedia a couple of times on my computer, (not on this account,) but how do I edit on mobile? --Widowgaming (talk)20:16, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there @Widowgaming, welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for reaching out with your question!

Although it’s a bit trickier than using a computer, you can absolutely edit on mobile! Check outWP:MOBILE andWP:DEVICES for some tips.

It’s fundamentally pretty similar, you hit the pencil icon in the top right of a page to start editing, make your changes, and hit ‘Publish’ to save them.

I’m actually replying to you from my iPhone right now! Let me know if you have any questions, and welcome again to Wikipedia :)SnowyRiver28(talk)22:44, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why would you remove an article on McIntyre Road when I can gurantee you never drove the road yourself. You probably live in the states and have some sense of authority over determining what road in Australia is good enough for a Wikipedia article. Spoiler alert: all of them. Text takes up barely any data. I see no reason why Wikipedia can't have articles about roads. Sure Wikipedia can't have so many articles about random and unofficial things but all public roads are literally an official government product. Reinstate McIntyre Road and I will give you a 5 star review. Right now?One starAustinBoath (talk)12:30, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @AustinBoath, I actually live in rural NSW and have been to Adelaide many times, not that that is relevant here at all.

If you read the message left on your talk page, you'll see that I nominated the article for deletion because a consensus discussion atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/McIntyre Road found it is unworthy of being included. This doesn't mean I personally do or don't think it's worthy, it's just a policy we have to prevent articles going in create-delete cycles constantly.

Further down in the message on your talk page, it says you should useWikipedia:Deletion review to review the consensus for deletion (linked above).

As for your comments about what we can and can't include,WP:NOTABILITY is the relevant guideline here, more specificallyWP:NROAD, neither of which I personally created, so please don't come after me regarding these guidelines.

Please let me know if you have any questions or comments.SnowyRiver28(talk)16:19, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note that I've had my own complaints with SnowyRiver and the deletion of a geography-based article (I mention it just to establish I'm not an ally/friend leaping to his defense), but if he's putting them to AfD not CSD/Draft space, then he's following the correct procedure. There is a difficulty because purists will say "no notable peer-reviewed scientific studies covered in CNN about this road" basically and it's difficult for any major highway to meet RS standards; the best solution here might be as suggested in the AfD to create the "Arterial Roads of Adelaide" article for now conglomerating them all together into one, and then in the future if the article becomes massive and heavily sourced look to separating some out?Fundy Isles Historian - J (talk)19:21, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Fundy Isles Historian - J. Just for transparency, I did CSD it, but only because it was previously deleted via AfD, and as I explained above this is just to prevent articles being created and deleted endlessly as if AfD consensus doesn't actually mean anything.WP:G4 is the official CSD criteria.

I think it's a quite unfair that you have "complaints" with me too by the way, as in your case I was also simply following established community guidelines likeWP:GNG andWP:GEONATURAL, the same as I am here in @AustinBoath's case.SnowyRiver28(talk)23:44, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk)22:51, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]