Archives

Archive 1

Kent Vanderwood, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Imzadi 1979 → 22:41, 17 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi WMrapids. I've closed you most recent RFC at WP:RSN, it's not the way to get the answers to the questions you asked. If you want clarification of the close of an RFC such as the original La Patilla, your first step should be to ask the closer. If you don't think their answer is satisfactory you can ask for the close to be reviewed at WP:AN.
RFCs are meant to be the last step in a process, not something you should rush into. I suggest you try discussion with other editors, and if you can't come to a consensus follow the advice at WP:DISPUTE. Also before you create any more RFC I strongly suggest you read WP:RFCBEFORE. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 09:43, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@ActivelyDisinterested: Thanks for the information and I'll try my best to apply it as needed. I genuinely am trying to avoid disputes and appreciate you taking the time to explain things to me (again). As I've said before, I really don't want to be involved in controversial topics, but I've seen a need in some areas. If you ever feel frustrated with explaining things to other editors (I this hope isn't the case with me), please remember that it's users like you who help guide others in the right direction, which is something vital for the project. I'll try to be careful with potential RfCs in the future and try other dispute resolution processes first. WMrapids (talk) 02:48, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WMrapids, after Siroxo closed the first RFC, and ActivelyDisinterested closed the second RFC, you queried Siroxo about contentious topics, and Siroxo clarified. There are no general sanctions on Venezuelan topics; BLPs are a contentious topic, Venezuela is not. Telesur is not a BLP or a contentious topic. And yet, you are doing this. Which part of the summary at WP:RSP of the close of La Patilla do you think supports your edit warring at Telesur? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:05, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The point where it says "be extremely cautious in referencing coverage of politics". Since La Patilla is a direct political opponent to those operating Telesur, it would be undue to have its coverage spread throughout the article of its opponent. I'll try to find better sources than La Patilla as I don't want to just gut the article. WMrapids (talk) 03:40, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think you're stretching the conclusions of the close, but more importantly, I see no edits on the talk page regarding the edit warring; please engage talk more to avoid multiple reverts requiring others to inquire about your logic. What I see is the removal of text whose point will be easily cited, as its the very reason Telesur is deprecated. They lie. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:01, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Whether or not they lie, are blatant propaganda, etc. does not mean that POV and undue content should be placed in the article. WMrapids (talk) 14:05, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Juan Guaidó, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Axios.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Signers of the Madrid Charter has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. NoonIcarus (talk) 00:09, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello WMrapids -- I've declined this speedy deletion request as G11 is meant for articles that are irredeemable promotion, with no factual content or reliable sources. Generally, if you feel the need to explain why something should be deleted, speedy is not the appropriate route. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 02:34, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Espresso Addict: Thank you for the explanation. Would you recommend a nomination for deletion instead? WMrapids (talk) 02:37, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your rationale "Article promoting the legitimization of the disputed presidency of Juan Guaidó. Topic is not notable, only covered by local sources and has no Spanish-language equivalent on Wikipedia, suggesting that this article is not relevant in the Spanish-speaking sphere and is solely promotional in nature. Article has not been edited since year of its creation." would be best explored at Articles for Deletion; then other editors with experience in the area (which I lack) would have a chance to respond. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 02:42, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good afternoon comrade. Just letting you know that I did notice your recent tag but won't be replying on the talk page. I have not been paying much attention to the regime change pages lately, since Guaidó has left the scene and appointed himself visiting professor at some red-neck U.S. university. Reward for service. Btw, I do admire your patience. Solidarity!! Burrobert (talk) 05:05, 20 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Eh, I'm not really in it for any idea, just that things seemed to be inaccurately balanced and I wanted to help the project; it's really the last place I want to be editing. It does take patience to work things out with those who are passionate about what they believe, though things seem to find a way in the end through discussion. WMrapids (talk) 05:36, 20 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(talk page watcher) xD --NoonIcarus (talk) 09:41, 20 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:WikiProject Peru topicon has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 18:08, 29 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Gonnym: Thank you for providing this! Much more simple. WMrapids (talk) 21:32, 29 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, WMrapids. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Fujimorist propaganda".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 14:13, 30 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An FYI; see where attribution is not needed. The idea behind the copying within guideline is that Wikipedia's licensing requires that individual's contributions be attributed; when you wholly write content and then (with no editor having changed that content) add the exact content you wrote to another article, CWW attribution isn't needed. It's all your work; no one else needs to be attributed. When in doubt, attribute, but in this case, as the edits were back to back, it was extra work you didn't need to do.

Separately, since summary style was used to trim the main article when the sub-article was created (because the main article was too long), let's not bloat the main article with individual opinions again-- that's why there's a sub-article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:42, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SandyGeorgia: Thank you for the information. I try to be as careful as possible with policy and it's probably good practice for me in case I'm forgetful with attribution. WMrapids (talk) 15:59, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	Felices fiestas
	We may not always agree on what's best, but I trust that we have been able to find common solutions many times. I sent you my warmest regards and wish you the best this season. Happy holidays! NoonIcarus (talk) 20:10, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is difficult when you track down pages I create, drive-by tag them and nominate them for deletion. Nevertheless, let's try to be as amicable as possible. WMrapids (talk) 14:05, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lima Consensus (economy) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lima Consensus (economy) 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 until the discussion has finished.

NoonIcarus (talk) 12:36, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	The Writer's Barnstar
	For having written, improved and expanded a large number of articles on Politics. Ultranuevo (talk) 17:36, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Caracazo

added a link pointing to The Telegraph

List of massacres in Venezuela

added a link pointing to The Telegraph

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:49, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]