This is anarchive of past discussions withUser:Soulbust.Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on thecurrent talk page.

2019 archive.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently editedList of National Football League annual punting yards leaders, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageAndy Lee (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links areusually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles.(Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:11, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleZombie Awareness Month is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should bedeleted.

The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zombie Awareness Month until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. »Shadowowl |talk11:36, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently editedStan Twitter, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageKeyboard (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk)09:42, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently editedJoel Klatt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageGus Johnson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk)09:29, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleList of most-subscribed YouTube channels is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should bedeleted.

The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of most-subscribed YouTube channels until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
 — Berean Hunter(talk)15:42, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for creatingBuilt Ford Tough Offensive Line of the Year.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of ourpage curation process and note that:

Thanks for filling in an empty spot in the NFL Awards navbox. Much appreciated.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with{{Re|Willsome429}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with~~~~ .

Message delivered via thePage Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Willsome429 (say hey orsee my edits!)07:49, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleList of most-subscribed YouTube channels is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should bedeleted.

The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of most-subscribed YouTube channels (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.THE NEWImmortalWizard(chat)19:03, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Template:Streamy Awards Series Winners Discontinued has beennominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion atthe template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing})19:50, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Template:Streamy Awards Actress Performance Winners has beennominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion atthe template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing})19:51, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Template:Streamy Awards Actor Performance Winners has beennominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion atthe template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing})19:51, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at theArticles for creation help desk or useWikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Legacypac was: This topic isnot sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Deleted via discussion twice in the last year

Legacypac (talk)06:52, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello,Soulbust!Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at theArticles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at theTeahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!Legacypac (talk)06:52, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Hey, Soulbust! I noticed you alphabetized the cats onKelly Catlin -- is that something you have to do manually, or is there a tool? Thanks for any help! I tried to find info on various guidelines and help pages and just keep going around in circles. --valereee (talk)14:28, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

A tag has been placed onDraft:Jaiden Animations, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done undersection G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following adeletion discussion, such as atArticles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you maycontest the nomination byvisiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line withWikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact thedeleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a requesthere.Legacypac (talk)18:56, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello,Soulbust

Please do not move categories. It is not like renaming an article or project page. Individual articles/pages are assigned to categories and when you move a category, it doesn't move all of the assigned pages to the new category name. So, you end up with a new category that is empty and an old category, which is actually being used, with a redirect tag which shouldn't happen.

If you want to retitle a category, please propose it atCategory speedy renames and then, if approved, a bot will reassign all of the articles to the new category name. Thank you.Liz^Read!Talk!01:39, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

HiLiz, I was planning to manually go to the articles and edit the category to the new one, but thank you for suggesting the proposal/bot renaming process to me. I was not familiar with it. Thanks,Soulbust (talk)04:32, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Category:Dance Showdown judges, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with thecategorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments atthe category's entry on thecategories for discussion page. Thank you.--woodensuperman12:09, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for uploadingFile:Cassie Cage Mortal Kombat X Render.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under aclaim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (seeour policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in anyarticles will be deleted after seven days, as described insection F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk)02:30, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at theArticles for creation help desk or useWikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Zxcvbnm was: This topic isnot sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: FailsWP:SUSTAINED since most of her notability came from one or two "publicity stunts". Also perWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belle Delphine, which was a fairly recent and definitive "delete" vote.

_{ZXCVBNM (TALK)}20:12, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you foryour contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance withHelp:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, thereversion of clear-cutvandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos)03:04, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

I think she is notable already, loads of reliable sources are available.— Precedingunsigned comment added by175.122.30.69 (talk)13:07, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Soulbust. This is a courtesy notice that thecopy edit you requested forWikipedia at theGuild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. Allfeedback welcome!Robotxlabs (talk)22:54, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Soulbust, the QPQ review you requested in your DYK review of this nomination has been provided. Please return when you can to continue your review. Many thanks.BlueMoonset (talk)00:56, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Do you think the draft is now good enough to be moved to mainspace?Aitch & Aitch Aitch (talk)00:08, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Your recent article submission toArticles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MurielMary was:

This submission's references do not show that the subjectqualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not showsignificant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject inpublished,reliable,secondary sources that areindependent of the subject (see theguidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (seetechnical help and learn aboutmistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Please read the criteira for a person to have a biography on Wikipedia. This person doesn't seem to meet the criteria.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmitwhen they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go toDraft:Belle Delphine and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go toDraft:Belle Delphine, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned andmay be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at theArticles for creation help desk, on thereviewer's talk page or useWikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

MurielMary (talk)23:52, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed atDraft:Belle Delphine. Thanks!MurielMary (talk)09:14, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently editedOverwatch animated media, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageOverwatch (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links areusually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles.(Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)07:18, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently editedOverwatch animated media, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageKeith Ferguson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk)07:50, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

When a removal is noted as BLP, the material in question absolutely must not be reinstated without a clear and unambiguous consensus. Should you ever do so again, you will beblocked from editing. BLP is absolutely not optional, and "not the best source" means not to use it, especially in controversial situations.Seraphimblade^{Talk to me}18:13, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

User:Seraphimblade,

You left out a part of my quote. I saidMashable "isn't the *best* source possible." And the context here is important. I meant it in a theoretical sort of way; theMashable source is thebest source available for the section it is citing. And it clearly passes any arbitrary threshold for usage as a source.Mashable has not been deemed non-credible (to my knowledge), nor has it been deemed inaccurate (again, to my knowledge). The source is relevant. And I can argue for its inclusion viaWP:SOURCE. Additionally, your point of "especially in controversial situations" is a relatively weak point. That's because–relative to the rest of the Onision article–a YouTube peer criticizing his writings is fairly clearly at the bottom of the barrel when it comes to a "controversial situation". By the way, you have not detailed, in any way, why theMashable source is "not a particularly good reference," as you described it in your original revert edit summary. What is your reasoning behind that? Can you better articulate why you believeMashable isn't a suitable or "particularly good reference" for the article, and specifically, the section it was citing? Because, again, I can argue that it checks out viaWP:SOURCE.

Additionally, I'd be remiss if I didn't bring up that your warning of a block comes with unclear instructions. In your edit summary, you state I'll be blocked if the source is reinstated "without better sourcing," but here on my talk page, you state that that block will happen if the source is reinstated "without a clear and unambiguous consensus." So which one is it? Do you want a different source? Or do you want the same source, but with support for its inclusion via a talk page discussion.

In short, I'll be starting a talk page discussion on the source, because you mentioned that the source being reinstated without a clear and unambiguous consensus would result in my block. So, with that in mind, I gather the source's reinstatementwith that type of consensus would be okay. And I'm fine with fellow editors discussing whether or not it could/should be reinstated. Best wishes,Soulbust (talk)07:32, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Having such a discussion is fine. The issue was, that when something controversial is removed for questionable sourcing from a BLP, it shouldnever be reinserted withoutfirst discussing it. If the consensus is that the sourcing is in this instance sufficient, that is fine. But such allegations should, generally speaking, probably be sourced to something better than a clickbait mill.Seraphimblade^{Talk to me}19:34, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

On11 December 2019,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleMerryll Saylan, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... thatMerryll Saylan helped pioneer the application of color and the use of secondary materials inwoodturning art(example pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Merryll Saylan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page(here's how,Merryll Saylan), and it may be added tothe statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk)00:01, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

comedy as art

Thank you for quality articles about films such as your firstThe Trouble with Bliss, comedians such asPewDiePie for millions of readers, and women in art such asMerryll Saylan, for contributing to Simple English, for service from 2012, - you are anawesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no.2323 of Precious, a prize ofQAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk)08:08, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently editedFroggy Fresh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageThe Baddest (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk)08:47, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

As the main editor on this particular Top 25 Report, I wanted to ask your thoughts on other editors changing or editing the content (seerevision history). I've also notifiedIgordebraga. ThanksShearonink (talk)13:10, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

I think in general, minor tweaks are okay. For older reports, I think the content should stay about the same, unless there are factual errors included.Soulbust (talk)15:17, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

• Wikipedians who have received a Teahouse invitation through AfC