User talk:IagoQnsi/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:IagoQnsi. 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 the current talk page.

Hi IagoQnsi! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! TheOriginalSoni (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:41, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Dear IagoQnsi, As you can see I made some improvements of GDAP Entertainment. Please see my contest to the speedy deletion. I hope you choose to leave the page on Wikipedia.

Best, Alex GameDeveloper 11 (talk) 21:08, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

I responded to your comments on the article's talk page. -IagoQnsi 21:13, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Just a tip - if a user blanks the page they've created, tag it db-G7 rather than db-A3. A3 is for pages that have been left for about an hour with nothing in except a repeat of the title, or a link to another site. Peridon (talk) 21:26, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Ah my mistake, forgot that criterion existed. Thanks for the tip! -IagoQnsi 21:29, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Hey,

Please see Talk:Flexcoin.

Thanks!

Cyborg4 :) (talk) 19:57, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at User talk:Jdmi2014, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:08, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

I think some oddity of that template must have hidden my signature, because it saw it in the source code of the page. I'm not sure what happened, but my mistake for not fixing. Thanks for the heads-up. -IagoQnsi 17:21, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bug bounty program, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Django (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

I think I made a mistake creating the page. It existed already under V766 Centauri. How do we merge new information with the old and remove the new page HR 5171 ? Silvio1973 (talk) 17:57, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

The easiest way to do this is to propose a merge; I'll do that now. -IagoQnsi 17:59, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I am quite new in the active Wikipedia community and I am not sure if this is the right place to discuss my issue. I saw you added the notability block to the iDempiere page some time ago. Because I am not so experienced I want to ask if you agree to remove this block after some people (including me) worked on the page. I still think the article can be made a bit better and I am sure the iDempiere commmunity will do it in the next months - but I think it has reached a state where I can remove the notability block. If not can you point me to the right direction for outstanding issues? Thomas Bayen (talk) 18:40, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Thomas! The best place to ask for comment on stuff like this is the Peer review page. Looking at the article now, it certainly looks like it has been very nicely fleshed out, but I am still not sure whether or not it meets the general notability guideline, so you might want to start a discussion over at the peer review page. And as for figuring out where to discuss things, one great place to start is the Village Pump. It has an index of where you should go for a variety of different issues (and asking someone for help on their talk page is also perfectly acceptable if you're not sure where to go!). Anyway, best of luck with iDempiere! -IagoQnsi 22:45, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi IagoQnsi this is Mathematicalist from Las Vegas. No worries on notability for Zuan Xin. Problem is the worldwide blackout of information about him and his team. My worry is that the article by DataDrivenOne is too technical. I am not Chinese but my Chinese friends get visibly upset when they find out that the solving of baccarat is being kept from them. Take care. Mathematicalist (talk) 03:45, 8 April 2014 (UTC) My friend IagoQnsi here in Las Vegas it is a dirty little secret that the casinos lie about the games that they promote. I think it is a big thing that a game that destroys tens of thousands of families has been unmasked. The references are solid. If you are a regular person you will study the references and then apologize. If not that means you are somehow affiliated with the bad guys and that I cannot believe. We need more people like Zuan Xin not less. Would that the Barry Obama Wikipedia page be eliminated for fraudulence than that Zuan Xin be nixed. You must not know much about gambling. You surely did not have sufficient time to study the references. My family is plagued by gambling addiction and that is why I decided to get Wikipedia and attack these fraudulent gambling articles like the one on blackjack that promote tournaments. My only problem with the Zuan Xin article is that it is too technical. Please leave it be or edit it for more constructive purposes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathematicalist (talk • contribs) 05:10, 8 April 2014 (UTC) ZUAN XIN SOURCE COMMENT My friend IagoQnsi this is one place where we have all the source information we can get. Baccarat betting official and unofficial was almost $10 trillion US last year and everybody in the gambling business is scared to death to discuss it. People who want to talk about baccarat now being a game of skill risk the meat cleaver in the back maiming such as that received by noted Hong Kong editor Kevin Lau. The fear is genuine. The bogeyman is real. I joined with my gambling expertise because I wanted to rid Wikipedia of all the casino industry biases, yes, casinos watch Wikipedia with their online staffs, because Wikipedia pops up prominently on any game title searches. The last thing casinos in the US or Asia want is Wikipedia revealing the truth about baccarat having been solved and that solution vetted at a major international gambling experts conference. Thanks for reviewing the article and I would recommend that you remove your tag. No one is willing to risk a meat cleaver in the back for a Wikipedia article. Thousands and thousands of families around the world whose love ones are baccarat gambling addicts will thank you. I thank you. Email me when you are next in Las Vegas and we will go get a buffet together. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathematicalist (talk • contribs) 18:51, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Dear IagoQnsi please let the Zuan Xin article be. I know your intentions are good but you do not know this subject matter. You are helping the lowest of the lowest parasites by helping the casino and gambling companies perpetuate the myth that baccarat is a game of luck. So many people that I know are hopelessly obsessed baccarat gambling addicts who have no idea that baccarat is a game of skill not a game of luck. Their families suffer, their suffering is real as real can be. So I say again dear IagoQnsi please let the Zuan Xin article be. It is in the spirit of Wikipedia. It is for the people not the corporate interests. There must be some other article that you can put your efforts on. The best substantiation possible is there. You really cannot expect a casino executive to go on the record saying Zuan Xin has indeed solved baccarat and thereby risk ostracism from his profession, can you? You really cannot expect a journalist in East Asia in the wake of the Kevin Lau meat cleaver maiming in Hong Kong to tell all the Chinese people that baccarat is solved and risk his or her very life, can you? Thanks for being a good Wikipedian and not a subverter of Wikipedia paid for and tasked by corporate interests in this case the casino and gambling interests. I like you am very busy so please just let this article be. Most of the casino and gambling related articles with respect to the table games and slot machines are biased to manipulate gamblers to lose more money that they cannot afford to lose. It is as if the casino and gambling interests wrote these articles themselves and defend them with their paid Wikipedia scanners and pseudo editors. Thanks IagoQnsi and with that let us agree that this matter is closed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DataDrivenOne (talk • contribs) 00:42, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

The purpose of all my edits is to help Wikipedia be the best it can be. If I see an article with a lot of problems that need to be addressed, I am obliged to take action to address those issues. Wikipedia articles must contain verifiable content. Even if it is true that the secret of baccarat is being concealed from the public, Wikipedia is not the place where such revelations should be made. Wikipedia is neither a soapbox nor a webhost; if you want to spread the word about Zuan Xin, that's great, but Wikipedia is not the place to do it. -IagoQnsi 00:51, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

You are completely in the wrong, my friend. Please do me the honor of explaining to me why you have taken it upon yourself to help the casino and gambling interests perpetuate their fraud on hundreds and hundreds of thousands of baccarat players around the world if not millions. Please explain to me what the purpose of Wikipedia is if not to inform. Please explain to me what your expertise in the casino and gambling area is. Please explain to me what your problem with the web links provided is where people can see primary source information or listen to it if they are so inclined. Please explain yourself. Stop hiding behind your anonymity so I can see if you are a casino or gambling lackie or not and if not so I can see why in the hell you would harm so many people who are being fucked over. Every time I try to make a contribution to Wikipedia I go into areas that are real with real effects on real people and I always run into the likes of you and no matter how I try to reason with you you cannot escape what you are. If you want to delete this article go ahead but what comes around goes around my friend and you will have done evil and helped the lowest of the lowest of the parasites. You obviously do not know much about the world and have much of a life to behave in this manner. So I am done with you and this matter should be finished now. Go ahead and delete the article or leave it be and move on to something else that needs work such as the fraudulence issues pertaining to Barry Obama. And by the way you cannot halt the inevitable march of Zuan Xin and his followers any more than the casino and gambling interests that intimidate the world press into embargoing and blockading this story the biggest story in gambling in fifty years. We all get to choose between doing good and doing evil every second of every day of our lives. I wish you success in choosing to go to the right and do good in this matter. Cheers. DataDrivenOne

I have no interest in stopping the spread of this information or anything to that effect. I am just here to try to enforce Wikipedia policy. By placing maintenance tags on an article, I am not trying to hinder you or even necessarily to have the article deleted; I am simply trying to make note of issues with the article. Maintenance templates do not stop anyone from seeing the article, and they do not mean your article is going to be deleted necessarily, so removing them from your article without resolving their concerns is both unnecessary and disruptive. -IagoQnsi 01:14, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I went ahead and closed The Nahun AfD you recently opened following its speedy deletion by Bbb23 as an uncontroversial A7. For future reference, you don't have to worry about dragging an article all the way to AfD if it's the author who is opposing the CSD nomination; the creator of an article cannot legitimately contest a speedy deletion tag, as that would constitute a pretty obvious conflict of interest. In cases like that, feel free to reapply the tag and a sysop will surely come around to tackle the job (like they did here, for instance). :-) Kurtis ^(talk) 01:26, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

The same applies to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom's Shoes for Composition II; the article is a pretty clear-cut case of A10, so I can pretty much guarantee that an administrator will be deleting it in a minute or two. By the way, kudos to you for taking up new page patrol. We could always use some extra hands in the area, especially those that show consideration for the people who create articles. Kurtis ^(talk) 01:32, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, and glad to be helping out! I've seen legitimate articles nearly get speedy deleted so I'm always trying to be as lenient as possible, but I'll be a little bit more hesitant to send relatively obvious deletes to AfD in the future. Cheers, IagoQnsi (talk) 21:52, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MikesiOSHelp, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MikesiOSHelp and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MikesiOSHelp during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. IagoQnsi (talk) 23:35, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with MikesiOSHelp. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message from a bot about this edit, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 23:45, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi,

Since your addition of the ref-improve template on the article, I'd say that there are enough references now to remove it. Let me know if you disagree. Cheers!----GouramiWatcher^(?) 23:58, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, IagoQnsi. You have new messages at Aakeefe's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks for the information! Do I need to change something now or can I just leave it. I was trying to figure this out and it seemed that since I was the only one who had edited or written on the page and only had just submitted it moments ago that it would be fine. I hadn't considered the issues you raise. I'm just wondering what I have to do now, if anything, in order for my page to be acceptable. I did mark the original "Mary ashley" page for speedy deletion. Should I change that and attempt to "move" it? Thank you again for your help.

Given that the original article only had three edits (only one of which was non-trivial), all made by you, I think it's totally fine to ignore the rule in this case and just leave things the way they are. I just thought I would let you know for future cases where you might need to move a page. Cheers, IagoQnsi (talk) 23:18, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, IagoQnsi. To add a link to your personal toolbar, just call addPortletLink:

addPortletLink('p-personal', 'http://link', 'label', 'id', 'tooltip');

No need for a user script. Replace p-personal with p-tb to add the link to the Tools section in the menu on the left, use p-cactions to add it to the drop-down menu next to the Search box (in Vector), etc. --V111P (talk) 00:39, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

I knew there was no way I was the first person to want to add toolbar links. Thanks for the info! -IagoQnsi (talk) 00:41, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello! Would you be so nice to please give me your opinion about the sources I inserted inside the voice Giuseppe Stampone, if you find they're ok for Wikipedia standards? Thanks The-invisible-monkey-business (talk) 14:57, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I weighed in on the deletion discussion for the The Real Richie Rich article, opposing your pro-deletion stance. Nothing personal though; I encountered some information you may not have come across. I don't think it's citable, but I'll keep looking for something that is. The original user also added some more unsourced and not really Wikipedia-kosher information, but it's nothing that can't be fixed. Why don't you have a look at the article and deletion discussion and see what you think. --TheRealDoctorJoe (talk) 23:41, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Added some external refs for the info in Far Eastern State University of Humanities, pls review tags. thx. User:Aramir — Preceding undated comment added 04:52, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

It could probably still use some more, but I guess you could at least remove primary sources tag. -IagoQnsi (talk) 23:41, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, please be more careful with your speedy deletion tags. When you tagged this article, it clearly stated that the subject had won an award. That alone, even without a reference, is a sufficient claim of significance to pass A7. Further, although the article lacked a {{reflist}} template, the article included references to The Guardian and the Huffington Post. Please have a closer look at the criteria before tagging any more articles. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:30, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I assumed based on the fact that neither MOTHA nor its award had an article that it didn't qualify as significant. However, in actuality, that would only be relevant to notability, not significance, so I should have really taken it to AfD instead. My apologies, it won't happen again. -IagoQnsi (talk) 22:58, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. Where there is no pressing need for deletion (ie, it doesn't meet one of the general criteria, in particular G10 and G12), it's usually a good idea to leave it for a little while to see if the author makes further improvements—deletion tags, especially when applied very shortly after an article's creation, are one of the most off-putting things to new editors and are believed to be a major factor in Wikipedia's problems with editor retention. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:53, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's true; I do try to keep that in mind as much as possible and hold off preemptive action. Thanks for the advice. -IagoQnsi (talk) 01:43, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Emoji, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ‼ (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

I've added more sources. Does Michael W. Davidson meet the general notability guideline now? 64.134.64.190 (talk) 23:39, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Those look like some pretty solid sources. It's debatable, but I think it's a pretty good candidate for meeting the guidelines. You might want to look at the notability guidelines specifically for academics. Also, the links in your article lend credence to notability, but the notability should also be established in the article itself -- write about what he's done that those articles indicate. Cheers, IagoQnsi (talk) 23:44, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. 64.134.64.190 (talk) 23:48, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

In the article God of Abrahem Isaac and Jacob, The Bang Theory (scientific) is only explained in the article. It does not contests the theory but is used to explain a point. Without the article being written in its complete form, it is not right to subject it for deletion. Rosario Fernandes (talk) 21:58, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

I've responded to this in the articles for deletion discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. -IagoQnsi (talk) 22:12, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

I respect your decision; I wanted you to know that I used that tag due to the "chat like comments" portion of the tag, as that's what the page seemed like to me. 331dot (talk) 23:29, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

(context: this is about a db-nocontent tag that 331dot placed on Solutions to DST that I removed.) Ah okay, that makes sense; the tone of that "article" was pretty casual. -IagoQnsi (talk) 23:33, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jake Kaufman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Supergroup. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:24, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Regarding your edit summary at Bala Mulloth, "looks like this page was made by Bala Mulloth, and that link was Bala Mulloth's LinkedIn, so it's probably not copyvio", we have to assume it's a copyvio until such time as we have ascertained that we are not violating copyright by carrying it. If the author has rights to authorize us to carry it, that authorization must be formally granted under WP:DCM. As it says at WP:G12, "This applies to text pages that contain copyrighted material with no credible assertion of public domain, fair use, or a compatible free license". —Largo Plazo (talk) 03:58, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Ah, I wasn't familiar with the detailed rules about copyvio -- thanks for letting me know. -IagoQnsi (talk) 04:06, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Next time you put up a BLPPROD using twinkle, please also make sure to patrol the page as well -- I dream of horses  If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message  (talk to me) (My edits) @ 01:47, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

@I dream of horses: You mean Matthew Maksimovic? I thought I would have marked that as reviewed the first time I added the BLPPROD tag (just added it for the third time :P). Apologies if I missed that though; I'll try to be more careful about remembering that PROD doesn't auto-mark-as-patrolled like CSD does. -IagoQnsi (talk) 01:49, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Please don't add deletion templates to pages created literally one minute ago. Consider waiting for ten minutes. Thanks. Ueutyi (talk) 04:34, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

@Ueutyi: Sorry about that, wasn't sure if you'd be revising it. When people have as many edits as you do, they tend to be using drafts/sandboxes, and usually I don't see them editing the page after their initial page creation (plus, I know they're not newcomers, so I'm less concerned about WP:BITE). I definitely wouldn't have tagged it had I seen the {{in use}} tag before I went to tag it. -IagoQnsi (talk) 04:44, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

I was using page translation, I can't use drafts (no, I cannot even add references using that tool). Thanks for your patrolling effort though. Ueutyi (talk) 04:46, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Ah okay, didn't know page translation doesn't play nice with drafts. I'll be more mindful of that in the future, sorry again. -IagoQnsi (talk) 04:48, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

No no it's fine, I am all-proof. Ueutyi (talk) 04:54, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

How can you want to delete an article that just is in work about 30 minutes? Do you think that someone can give you respect for your way of professional work? Wikipedia is a serious media site i thought. Starting a destruction like you did is poor. Tomorrow I will check and contact some admins for getting a better perspective. Good night. --Nature024 (talk) 01:30, 1 March 2016 (UTC) (talk)

@Nature024: Hi Nature. If you would like to spend a considerable amount of time working on a new article, it is recommended that you do so in your personal sandbox, so that the article is not subject to criticism or deletion until you are ready for it to be viewed. When you start an article outside of your sandbox, it is standard for the article to face deletion after thirty minutes or so of being empty. Click here to learn more about writing your first article.

Also, before you go contacting administrators about my actions, you should know that your article actually was deleted by an administrator, as seen in this deletion log. I marked the article for deletion, and an admin checked that my reason for deletion was good and deleted it. Cheers, IagoQnsi (talk) 01:36, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Listen Mr.IagoQnsi , now you can go with any wikiadmin to a party and celebrate your poor radical brains. The way you deleted my 30 minute work shows me what stupid aggressive people are working here on wikipedia. You guys take it here so seriously that I lost my respect of you as a human. Don`t think that you are special here and feelin intelligance. Wikipedia is just another digital forum. Most people are not surfing wikipedia to get serious information about the life and world. Wikipedia has thousands of different "User" who are looking for attention and fighting for a big place here to get the chance playing one day God like you did yesterday. Just cleaned UP ME and a Stuart Styron! Beeing friendly and sensitive is the way of a human. You had to write me just some words that I am wrong in what I `m doing. But no, you Cleaned up. Listen up, digital executer and phantom of the billions of administrator on internet... Remember my written words: One day, sooner or later, one human or a creature will clean up and delete something from you. That will be coming back on day back to you. I promise. That lesson is waiting for you. Goodbye. --Nature024 (talk) 07:25, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

@Nature024: My intention wasn't to cost you thirty minutes of work. If you would like to restore the text of your article so you can work on it more, you can make a request for undeletion, and an admin can move the deleted page text to your private userspace. Cheers, IagoQnsi (talk) 07:29, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Your intention represented just the "wannabe serious Professor Dr. Wikipedia of the universe". I am smart and strong enough to let the things how they are. Wikipedia is not important enough for me to start a long big fight with digital strangers. A real place of intelligent nice people, learning, growing up together and having also fun and a good time, you will find not here. Wikipedia gets more and more a diificult and dangerous idea. One day it will break down completly. There is still not enough money to hold it clean and serious. Think of my words. In some years they all will lose the respect of it. No one here should feel that he is important and needed. Everyone is not interested of his next. The digital world is not stable and an illusion at the end. Now I will remember you as the most senseless & radical digital person ever. Goodbye. Do not answer again. --Nature024 (talk) 08:18, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

You do you, buddy. -IagoQnsi (talk) 08:20, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

why did you delete all the article that i created Kukujiao (talk) 08:42, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Because it was vandalism/nonsense. -IagoQnsi (talk) 08:43, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi - RE Sydenham Arts - I am finding more information to add to the article. It will get better, and have more facts! Please be a little patient. Thank you. 86.131.191.89 (talk) 15:23, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

@86.131.191.89: Hi. Your message was placed in the middle of another message, so I have moved it to a new section at the bottom of the page; please be careful where you place your message when editing talk pages. As for adding sources to Sydenham Arts, by all means go for it. Once/if you think you've sufficiently demonstrated the notability of the topic, you can present your case for keeping the article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sydenham Arts. Cheers, IagoQnsi (talk) 15:28, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi IagoQnsi - How come you set my page for deletion within minutes of my setting it up. I had written one sentence and BANG! How can I write a good article that meets the rules and learn how to contribute to wikipedia when I get blown away in minutes. I have contested the deletion but I would love to know how you can make such a judgement without knowing what I am going to write? Thanks Light EngineerLight Engineer (talk) 17:48, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Apologies, I should have waited longer. FYI: Before you spend a long time writing an article, you might want to look at the general notability guideline so that you know what is necessary for an article to be covered in Wikipedia. Sorry again for the overly-speedy deletion. Cheers, -IagoQnsi (talk) 17:57, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for patrolling new pages, a vital and under-appreciated task, but please don't tag newly created articles with WP:CSD#A1 or WP:CSD#A3 too soon after creation. While things like copyright violations and attack pages need to be tagged at once, new contributors often put in a word or two and then click "Save page" to see how it looks: it is discouraging and BITEy if a speedy-deletion template pops up at once. For incomplete articles like Jovani oviedo just now, you should make a note of the title and wait at least 10 - 15 minutes before tagging. See {{uw-hasty}}.

There is general advice about new page patrolling at WP:NPP, and about speedy tagging at WP:10CSD and WP:A7M. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:20, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Apologies, I got a bit carried away today, I'll be more mindful moving forward. -IagoQnsi (talk) 18:26, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Steve Clarke (Drummer)

added links pointing to Network, Cliff Evans, Fastway and Paul Rogers

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that Observer article -- the one you mentioned in AFD:Dr. Shimi Kang. I'll be referring to it often at AfD.

But just a caution: I now work primarily on screening new articles, and as an administrator reviewed tens of thousands of them for deletion. I could not possibly go at the rate you are going and do the work accurately, nor do I know of anyone who could. And I find that if I do more than 10 in a row, or so, that I tend to lose the ability to discriminate. The best way to avoid becoming jaded is to take a few a day , and fix them. DGG ( talk ) 01:18, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@DGG: Not a bad idea at all -- I tend to binge-patrol the new pages feed, but maybe that's not the best approach. I'll slow it down. Thanks for the suggestions. -IagoQnsi (talk) 21:46, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for notifying me of this. It will not happen again. Ethanlu121 (talk) 21:57, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Sorry that I didn't leave a message in undoing those edits. I'm working on something and it might be a little while before my updates are ready to go live. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HectorDupont (talk • contribs) 22:56, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey thanks for letting me know about my good contributions to articles. finally a friendly face around here!! Zach.Dowding.Wiki (talk) 02:55, 10 March, 2016 (UTC)

@Zach.Dowding.Wiki: Sure thing! :) -IagoQnsi (talk) 04:51, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your note re new pages lacking content., I am sure that it was well intentioned and we certainly do not want to drive away newcomers who intend to edit and contribute responsibly. However after ten years on Wikipedia I think that I can spot a page that is being edited with more responsible content to come and one that is going to remain empty with the author having no intention of creating a sensible article. I note that the article in question has been speedy deleted. Paste _{Let’s have a chat.} 22:29, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Game Developers Choice Awards, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Todd Howard. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

If you're looking for more references that are published sources that verify the organization's contribution to validate its existence as a page, they're listed under Further Reading. My formatting is not pretty but my sources are there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apathetic.Realist (talk • contribs) 21:59, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Please refer to immigrant #23. After you realize your mistake, stay off my talk page. Sincerely yours,

03:43, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

File:U.S. Immigration records mentioning Friedr Trumpf.jpg

@Knowledgebattle: Fair enough; since the claim appears to be true, you should add an inline citation there as evidence of the the birth name. (also, I've changed the above image to a link since it's really big) -IagoQnsi (talk) 03:45, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

@IagoQnsi: Very well; will do. I'm aware that it was big; I did that on purpose to help you see it, figuring that you would resize it after you read it.

^K_Bⁿ_a^o_t^w_t^le_l^d_e^e

03:49, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

...template the regulars, such as you did here. It is not helpful, not needed, and makes you look rather silly. Thanks. Cassianto^Talk 21:17, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

@Cassianto: Yep, I've stopped doing that now. Sorry about that. Cheers, IagoQnsi (talk) 21:19, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

No problem, and thanks for taking it on the chin. Cheers. Cassianto^Talk 21:21, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi IagoQnsi, Apologies for rollbacking - I'm busy going through the AFD log and it was the quickest option,
Anyway I've had to revert and reclose the AFD you closed as you never added the AFD footer so it buggers up the log,
There is a script somewhere that everyone uses to close AFDs so it may be a better idea for you to use it as oppposed to doing it manually, Thanks & Happy editing, –Davey2010^Talk 01:17, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

@Davey2010: Ah, I figured there was probably an automated option somewhere. I'll look for that, thanks. Sorry about the mess, didn't realize I'd done that! Cheers, IagoQnsi (talk) 04:35, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

No worries - We all make mistakes so it's all cool :),

Bollocks sorry I was meant to have found it earlier for you, If you add importScript('User:Mr.Z-man/closeAFD.js'); into your skin javascript (Preferences > Appearance - You'll have 4 skins - Shove it in the one you're using, Smack refresh/F5 - and waallaaa it should work! :)), The AFD closer's easy as pie but if you need help or whatever let me know :), Thanks & Happy editing, –Davey2010^Talk 04:59, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

That link Genzparez keeps inserting is actually his own website, since public WHOIS details contain a name which matches his username. Without any additional details, I'd say it's link spamming because it's the owner of a website inserting a link to his own website on a tangentially related article. Elaenia (talk) 05:55, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi IagoQnsi. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Katie^talk 13:53, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

@KrakatoaKatie: Awesome, thanks Katie! :) -IagoQnsi (talk) 14:48, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Legere, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CES. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:56, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. Are you saying that JesusFreakHideout.com is not a reliable source? I note that it's been listed on Wikipedia 647 times, meaning 647 other articles consider it to be reliable (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=jesusfreakhideout&fulltext=Search) 182.255.99.214 (talk) 02:45, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

@182.255.99.214: Its reviews, which seem to be the primary thing being cited, may be reliable. However, I don't think its biography page is sufficiently reliable, especially when there's clearly an indication that the birth date is disputed (it looks like that birth date might have been added with less scrutiny, since it's just listed as a statistic, rather than being part of an article). -IagoQnsi (talk) 02:50, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Any thoughts on the weird Hilary Billings page, which originally had a horse image as a temporary placeholder? I wasn't sure if it was an attack page or a COI promotional page.HappyValleyEditor (talk) 03:48, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

@HappyValleyEditor: Looks like the horse was added by a second editor, and otherwise the page is perfectly kind to Billings. Maybe they had some innocent reason why they thought that was okay? It's not explicitly clear that the editor was trying to attack with that image, so I'm assuming good faith. With the image removed, I think the page is okay to be left as-is if nothing else sketchy is added (and I doubt it'll survive AfD anyway). Cheers, IagoQnsi (talk) 03:52, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I created an article for an application Project Planning Pro which is has a notable reference of a website and magazine "Cult of Mac". The awards which you found sketchy are real but still, I have removed it and hoping it is worthy of staying on wikipedia now. Jayvyas18 (talk) 07:58, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that reference didn't seem to me to be a sufficient indicator of notability. The best place to discuss this is here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Project Planning Pro -IagoQnsi (talk) 16:34, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Please do not delete the page Jerry Jackson (cartoon). It took me hours to write. --Mister Jerry Jackson (talk) 17:25, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

@Mister Jerry Jackson: I'm sorry, but all Wikipedia articles must meet a certain set of criteria, including a general notability guideline, which Jerry Jackson does not appear to meet. You can make your case for keeping the article at the deletion discussion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jerry Jackson (cartoon). Regards, IagoQnsi (talk) 17:28, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

On 2 April 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2016 Kolkata overpass collapse, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:36, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Hey there!

Recently I noticed that there is an issue which is related to Mr. Gomez that you have some unwanted inconveniences during adding some information to the article with. It could be very inspiring if I had the occasion to help you immediately, however I am involved in my exams. Furthermore, if it was a chance to come back to you, I will not hesitate to help you fix the problems. Milad Mosapoor (talk) 00:40, 16 June 2016 (GMT)

I don't know if it's too much to ask from you, but would you mind doing an NPOV for this article? Seems like recent controversial statements by one of the election candidates has made this a hot topic. Anton000 (talk) 15:11, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:West Virginia Wildcatz logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim 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 (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:32, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

The article Dan Williams (soccer, born 1988) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Hasn't received significant coverage nor played in a fully pro league match. Therefore, the article fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mikemor92 (talk) 23:37, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nursultan_Nazarbayev#Atheism --YOMAL SIDOROFF-BIARMSKII (talk) 23:20, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello IagoQnsi.

Based on the patrols you made of new pages during a qualifying period in 2016, your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed.

New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:34, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello, IagoQnsi. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

I am wondering why you removed a PROD at Ruff (operating system) and replaced it with an AfD nomination. If you thought the article should be deleted, the obvious thing to do would be to leave the PROD, and take it to AfD only if someone else contests it. I am not complaining about what you did, but I just thought it would be interesting to know why you did it. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:54, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

@JamesBWatson: Hey, sorry about that! I loaded the page before you had PRODded it, and Twinkle didn't raise an error when I started the AfD, so I didn't realize what had happened until the AfD was already created. If I had realized you had PRODded it, I would have left it be. Sorry! -IagoQnsi (talk) 15:47, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

OK. That makes perfect sense. No problem. I am rather surprised that Twinkle just removed the PROD without coming up with an edit conflict notification, though. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:50, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello IagoQnsi,

Breaking the back of the backlog

We now have 810 New Page Reviewers! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog. Now it's time for action.

If each reviewer does only 10 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
Let's get that over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.

Second set of eyes

Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work. Read about it at the new Monitoring the system section in the tutorial.

Getting the tools we need - 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey: Please vote

With some tweaks to their look, and some additional features, Page Curation and New Pages Feed could easily be the best tools for patrollers and reviewers. We've listed most of what what we need at the 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey. Voting starts on 28 November - please turn out to make our bid the Foundation's top priority. Please help also by improving or commenting on our Wishlist entry at the Community Wishlist Survey. Many other important user suggestions are listed at at Page Curation.

---

Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:16, 26 November 2016 (UTC) .

Remember that when adding content about health, please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations (There are several kinds of sources that discuss health: here is how the community classifies them and uses them). WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a built-in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:49, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Hey, sorry about that. I saw a lot of content being deleted that didn't look terrible at a glance, and there wasn't much of an explanation in the edit summary. In the future I'll be sure to look closer before reverting well-established editors. Cheers, IagoQnsi (talk) 21:52, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at McAllen, Texas. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. IagoQnsi (talk) 16:40, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Please refrain from issuing warnings to an IP address. I'm at a hotel using their WiFi and have no idea who you're talking to when I use Wikipedia and see a warning like this. -107.77.222.6 (talk) 17:18, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

IP addresses are not exempt from being warned about problems with their edits. For shared IPs such as yours, we typically add a message to the talk page explaining that the messages might not necessarily be directed to you, but we definitely still post messages. -IagoQnsi (talk) 00:00, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

New Page Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC))

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

1. Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
2. Editor-focused central editing dashboard
3. "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
4. Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
5. Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello IagoQnsi,

Please help reduce the New Page backlog

This is our second request. The backlog is still growing. Your help is needed now - just a few minutes each day.

Getting the tools we need

ONLY TWO DAYS LEFT TO VOTE

• Improve the tools: Vote here.
• Reduce your review load: Vote here

---

Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:54, 11 December 2016 (UTC) .

Hello IagoQnsi,

A HUGE backlog

We now have 810 New Page Reviewers!
Most of us requested the user right at PERM, expressing a wish to be able to do something about the huge backlog, but the chart on the right does not demonstrate any changes to the pre-user-right levels of October.

The backlog is still steadily growing at a rate of 150 a day or 4,650 a month. Only 20 reviews a day by each reviewer over the next few days would bring the backlog down to a managable level and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
It didn't work in time to relax for the Xmas/New Year holidays. Let's see if we can achieve our goal before Easter, otherwise by Thanksgiving it will be closer to 70,000.

Second set of eyes

Remember that we are the only guardians of quality of new articles, we alone have to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged by non-Reviewer patrollers and that new authors are not being bitten.

Abuse

This is even more important and extra vigilance is required considering Orangemoody, and

1. this very recent case of paid advertising by a Reviewer resulting in a community ban.
2. this case in January of paid advertising by a Reviewer, also resulting in a community ban.
3. This Reviewer is indefinitely blocked for sockpuppetry.

Coordinator election

Kudpung is stepping down after 6 years as unofficial coordinator of New Page Patrolling/Reviewing. There is enough work for two people and two coords are now required. Details are at NPR Coordinators; nominate someone or nominate yourself. Date for the actual suffrage will be published later.

---

Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:11, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Your last chance to nominate yourself or any New Page Reviewer, See Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Coordination. Elections begin Monday 20 February 23:59 UTC. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello IagoQnsi,

Voting for coordinators has now begun HERE and will continue through/to 23:59 UTC Monday 06 March. Please be sure to vote. Any registered, confirmed editor can vote. Nominations are now closed.

Still a MASSIVE backlog

We now have 810 New Page Reviewers but despite numerous appeals for help, the backlog has NOT been significantly reduced.
If you asked for the New Page Reviewer right, please consider investing a bit of time - every little helps preventing spam and trash entering the mainspace and Google when the 'NO_INDEX' tags expire.

---

Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:35, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello IagoQnsi,

Since rolling out the right in November, just 6 months ago, we now have 810 reviewers, but the backlog is still mysteriously growing fast. If every reviewer did just 55 reviews, the 22,000 backlog would be gone, in a flash, schwoop, just like that!

But do remember: Rather than speed, quality and depth of patrolling and the use of correct CSD criteria are essential to good reviewing. Do not over-tag. Make use of the message feature to let the creator know about your maintenance tags. See the tutorial again HERE. Get help HERE.

Stay up to date with recent new page developments and have your say, read THIS PAGE.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:43, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

NOBODY has any business in somebody else/s sandbox... Not for any reason... GWFrog (talk) 04:43, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

@GWFrog: Per WP:USERNOCAT, user pages are not allowed to have categories intended for content pages. When you use content categories on a user page, everyone sees your page when they visit those categories -- it doesn't just affect your page. That's why I needed to edit the page even though it's your sandbox; I wouldn't edit someone else's sandbox for any other reason. IagoQnsi (talk) 04:55, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

NOBODY has any business in somebody else/s sandbox... Not for any reason... GWFrog (talk) 04:43, 16 June 2017 (UTC) —Preceding comment dated "04:43, 16 June 2017 (UTC)" actually posted at 04:58, 16 June 2017‎ (UTC)

@GWFrog: Alright, sorry, I won't edit your pages again. I've never had anyone complain over simply removing categories that weren't allowed to be there anyway. Per WP:NOBAN, it is generally considered acceptable to make edits to other users' pages when it's likely edits are expected and/or will be helpful. -IagoQnsi (talk) 05:08, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

As it happens, due to a minor bit of missing info, I am still working on the article to which the categories are attached, and if you had done it while I was working, there could have been an edit conflict on a major edit... Annoying on an edit of an article; infuriating in one's own sandbox...And,yes, I had that happen recently when a bot made a change while I was working... Not supposed to happen, they say, but... GWFrog (talk) 05:18, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello IagoQnsi, apologies for the notice spam, but I wanted to let you know that I listed a couple of your redirects to the Chucklefish article at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 July 10, as they did not seem helpful. Please feel free to take part in the respective discussions. Lordtobi (✉) 07:53, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello IagoQnsi, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 18,511 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
• Some editors are committing to work specifically on patrolling new pages on 15 July. If you have not reviewed new pages in a while, this might be a good time to be involved. Please remember that quality of patrolling is more important than quantity, that the speedy deletion criteria should be followed strictly, and that ovetagging for minor issues should be avoided.

Technology update:

• Several requests have been put into Phabractor to increase usability of the New Pages Feed and the Page Curation toolbar. For more details or to suggest improvements go to Wikipedia:Page Curation/Suggested improvements
• The tutorial has been updated to include links to the following useful userscripts. If you were not aware of them, they could be useful in your efforts reviewing new pages:
  • User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js adds a link to the new pages feed and page curation toolbar to your top toolbar on Wikipedia
  • User:The Earwig/copyvios.js adds a link in your side toolbox that will run the current page through

General project update:

• Following discussion at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers, Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Noticeboard has been marked as historical. Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers is currently the most active central discussion forum for the New Page Patrol project. To keep up to date on the most recent discussions you can add it to your watchlist or visit it periodically.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello IagoQnsi, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 16,991 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.

Technology update:

• Rentier has created a NPP browser in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.

General project update:

• The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the autoconfirmed article creation trial. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features.
• Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not tagbombing are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which can be added to your toolbar for ease of use with this user script.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello IagoQnsi, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
• Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!

Technology update:

• The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: T175225

General project update:

• On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
• Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello IagoQnsi, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
• We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.

Technology update:

• Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel.

General project update:

• The Article Wizard has been updated and simplified to match the layout style of the new user landing page. If you have not yet seen it, take a look.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aftab Pureval 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/Aftab Pureval until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:13, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello, IagoQnsi. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello IagoQnsi, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
• Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

Outreach and Invitations:

• If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: {{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive

• A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
• Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update:

• ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
• The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Todd Rogers (video game player), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Polaroid (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:02, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello IagoQnsi, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1^st and run until January 29^th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

• The total number of reviews completed for the month.
• The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and removed a section you added to Markus Persson. As far as I can tell, the twitter controversies mentioned were very brief and did not substantially contribute to the notability of the individual in question - in particular, it seems to be more akin to a trivia factoid list, and did not pass wp:sustained. BrxBrx(talk)^{(please reply with { {re|BrxBrx}})} 22:11, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

@BrxBrx: I would argue that there is sustained coverage. Persson has an ongoing pattern of tweeting political/social opinions that cause controversy. Each individual tweet may not be notable on its own, but as a series, it warrants mentioning. The Daily Dot "pizzagate" article and Inverse "ok to be white" article, for example, both call back to the "straight pride" tweets and describe the latest tweets as part of an ongoing history with Persson. The wording in the section perhaps needs to change to put the focus on the broader trend rather than on each individual incident, but I do think the content is still worth covering. -IagoQnsi (talk) 22:37, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

@BrxBrx: Not to mention, the notability guidelines are for establishing what topics get their own articles, not for deciding precisely what bits of info will be included in an article. An article section doesn't have to be notable outside of the context of the article (and in fact, if a section were notable outside the article's context, it would be worthy of its own article). -IagoQnsi (talk) 22:42, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello IagoQnsi, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
• We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!

New Year Backlog Drive results:

• We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update:

• ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
• Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

IagoQnsi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

UTRS appeal #20581 was submitted on Feb 09, 2018 21:48:28. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 21:48, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Lagoqnsi, why did yiu flag my picture as possible copy right issue. I am a Bsr Practitioner 432 and have full right and ownership to place BSR content as long as I adhere to our own internal copy right rules within the BSR association . Kindly revert back my page Info to what it was and perhaps query this before you make changes. Thank you Stekkies2 (talk) 10:27, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

This is about an issue on Commons, so I've responded to it on my Commons talk page instead of here: commons:User talk:IagoQnsi#Comment from Stekkies2. -IagoQnsi (talk) 14:33, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

IagoQnsi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

UTRS appeal #20781 was submitted on Mar 02, 2018 22:41:49. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 22:41, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I suspect that the person is contributing on her own page. I've added banners and necessary references.LaMèreVeille (talk) 13:24, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

@LaMèreVeille: Yeah I had the same thought. Thanks for looking into that for me! :) --IagoQnsi (talk) 20:50, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

I have granted your account an exemption from IP blocking. This will allow you to edit through full blocks affecting your IP address when you are logged in.

Please read the page Wikipedia:IP block exemption carefully.

Appropriate usage and compliance with the policy may be checked (through the use of CheckUser) periodically, due to the nature of block exemption, and block exemption will be removed when no longer needed (for example, when the block it is related to expires).

I hope this will enhance your editing, and allow you to edit successfully and without disruption. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 08:21, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

@Zzuuzz: Thank you very much, I really appreciate it! -IagoQnsi (talk) 08:30, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello there from Portugal,

thanks for engaging in conversation with me. I have pretty much covered all aspects in my last edit summary (because i have edited there again), please get back to me if you have any further doubts. Surely, we can reach a compromise.

Happy editing, sorry for any inconvenience --Quite A Character (talk) 16:44, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

• More compromise (and thanks again for the kind message and notifications!), i tried to reduce the usage of words like - in this case - "Josu" or "club" in the same paragraph, but your wording remained pretty much unaltered, thanks for the additions. In reference #8, as the author of the article works for the official website of the club, with just the "publisher" field we are covered i believe. Regarding the team's run in the LH Cup, i feel it's always important to have two links, one for competition and the other for SEASON of competition; hope that makes sense.

Cheers back (P.S. regarding the TWITTER link, i have myself - with no harm stemming from it - removed such links from player articles and seen others do it, but of course this one remains out of respect for you). --Quite A Character (talk) 17:59, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Josu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alan Koch (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

I saw you removed her photo. Who is claiming a copyright infringement of Randa Jarrar's photograph? The photographer has given permissions Please reply — Preceding unsigned comment added by RRBBLL (talk • contribs) 22:54, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

@RRBBLL: I have marked the photo, File:Randa Jarrar at The Secret Society Of The Sisterhood at The Masonic Lodge at Hollywood Forever on January 31, 2018 in Los Angeles, California.png, as a copyright violation on Wikimedia Commons. The photo comes from Getty Images, and all of their photos are copyrighted and published with non-free licenses. You can dispute the copyright violation claim on the image page on Commons (see the "Appeal" note at the bottom of the red deletion notice). –IagoQnsi (talk) 22:58, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

16:18, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

16:28, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

22:23, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for cleaning up all that page-move vandalism. It's always a pain when this happens. Mz7 (talk) 04:01, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that Cammom, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• The page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. (See section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do.
• It is unambiguous vandalism or an obvious hoax. (See section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please do not introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia; doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.
• It is a redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer. (See section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting 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 with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. BilCat (talk) 03:36, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

@BilCat: Yeah, I don't think I'll be contesting this one. ;) --IagoQnsi (talk) 03:55, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, that was added by Twinkle. - BilCat (talk) 04:17, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

17:34, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi. I replied to your message removing my edit. As a club member I can confirm the nicknames Brig and The Brig are both correct. Please can you reinstate the change. Cheers CattingtonCat (talk) 21:54, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

12:40, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

21:54, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

21:55, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

On 14 June 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article FC Cincinnati stadium, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the design of Cincinnati's new soccer stadium features homages to Allianz Arena in Munich? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, FC Cincinnati stadium), and it may be added to the 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 the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 14 June 2018 (UTC)