Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16

January - February 2024 March 2024 April 2024 May - June 2024 User talk:SafariScribe/Archive 5 User talk:SafariScribe/Archive 6 User talk:SafariScribe/Archive 7

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

22 March 2025
From the editor: Hanami Opinion: Talking about governments editing Wikipedia News and notes: Deeper look at takedowns targeting Wikipedia In the media: The good, the bad, and the unusual Recent research: Explaining the disappointing history of Flagged Revisions; and what's the impact of ChatGPT on Wikipedia so far? Traffic report: All the world's a stage, we are merely players... Gallery: WikiPortraits rule! Essay: Unusual biographical images Obituary: Rest in peace
Single page Front page About Subscribe Suggestions Archives

Resources for maintenance and collaboration
Cleanup
Articles needing attention Articles needing cleanup Copy to Wikisource Copyediting Deorphan an article Wikification Notability Sorting Progress boxes Spam Template messages Update an article
Categories
Articles to be categorized General cleanup Uncategorized categories Other reports on categories Links to more pages
Create an article
Missing encyclopedic topics Most wanted Requested articles Requests 1 year+ Review anonymous article submissions Short pages Stale userspace drafts
Referencing
Articles lacking sources Need more references Original research
Stubs
Advice Incomplete lists Long stubs Most wanted Short pages Stubs by topic Stubs included directly in stub categories
Deletion
Articles Categories Discussion archives Files Log Misc. pages Redirects Review Speedy Templates
Polishing
Featured candidates Fill a topic list Peer review Popular low quality articles Articles for improvement
Translation into English
Existing pages Wikipedia:Dump reports/Missing articles Spanish trans. of the week Wikipedia:Translation
Images
Caption review Images for cleanup Images with missing articles Other reports on files Requested pictures
Controversy
Article accuracy Neutrality Statement accuracy
To-do lists
Articles Projects
Disambiguation
Disambiguation Hatnotes Manual of Style Disambiguation Templates
More
Active wiki fixup projects Articles to merge Articles to split Backlogs Copyright violations Dated statements Expert request sorting Missing names Open tasks Reports on redirects Requests Unused templates
For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.

The world was created for all.

No one is perfect even AI's do mis fault. Stay cool, just alert me and I will see it off!

— SafariScribe

If you are here just to castigated me (I know there shouldn't be "d", so it's a mistake; fix it yourself), please don't come here. Find anywhere in your talk page, then ping me for opinion. Welcome to my talk page, and ask questions as you will answer when it's thrown to you. I have no other account and have never edited for any payment whatsoever.

A month ago we talked about an article I wrote. I am a paid contributor. I'm trying to follow all the guidelines and you helped me with that. I added some part to make it more impartial, talking about criticism. This article has already been previously approved by @Qcne. Can you check and see if you can exit drafts again?

The article Sex, Love, Misery: New New York has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable, see Talk page

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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.

Hello, SafariScribe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Roberto R. Treviño".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, 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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:52, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, are you still planning to review Draft:Table 2 Fallacy? Myrealnamm (💬Let's talk · 📜My work) 19:55, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Myrealnamm, I am sorry for not responding. I have reviewed it since. Thank you. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:34, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for improving article quality in March! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:19, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate @Gerda Arendt. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:34, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Today, 300 years of Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern, BWV 1! We sang works for (mostly) double choir by Pachelbel, Johann Christoph Bach, Kuhnau/Bach, Gounod and Rheinberger! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:41, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Draft:Ellen Roy Herzfelder, I'm a bit confused. How do sources like this ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9]) that are full length articles spanning several years that are entirely about her not showcasing her notability? Silverseren^C 04:40, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Silver seren, I am sorry for the above. I felt relaxed seeing that the draft has been moved to the article space. Please it may be a mistake and not a big deal to criticise AFC. You are a quality and competent editor, please accept my apology. For the draft, I hadn't thought it meets out WP:NPOL criteria, but since no one has taken it to AFD, it is fine. The sources you presented above are good and enough to verify she holds a public notable office. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:37, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SafariScribe,

Hope you're well!

I appreciate your time reviewing the Wikipedia draft for Dr. Constance Scharff. I noticed that the article was declined due to concerns about notability, and I’d like to discuss these points with you.

Dr. Scharff meets Wikipedia’s notability criteria through:

• Coverage in independent, secondary sources, including three books featuring her work.
• Articles in Forbes and Psychology Today (with 39+ articles published).
• A prestigious humanitarian award (Sol Feinstone Award, St. Lawrence University, 2019).
• A national TV interview (CBS-affiliate KOIN 6 News, 2021).

I’d appreciate your guidance on how we can strengthen the submission and meet Wikipedia’s standards.

Draft link:

Draft:Constance Scharff (mental health researcher)

Thank you!

Lisa Courtnadge Lisacourtnadge (talk) 06:01, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Lisacourtnadge, how are you? First, I want you to declare per WP:COI, your connection with the doctor. Aside that, there may be less help coming. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:40, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SafariScribe, I'm well, I hope you are too!

I have worked with Dr. Scharff for years now. I think she really deserves a wiki page for her contributions to the field.

I understand the importance of maintaining neutrality, so I want to be fully transparent about my professional connection with her.

That said, I believe the draft demonstrates that she meets Wikipedia’s notability guidelines through independent sources, books, media coverage, prestigious awards, and numerous articles in reputable publications.

I want to make sure the article aligns with Wikipedia's standards. If there are specific areas where I could improve sourcing or structure to better meet the criteria, I’d really appreciate your guidance.

Thanks so much for your time!

Lisa Courtnadge 102.223.104.244 (talk) 16:32, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SafariScribe,

I hope you're well.

I wanted to follow up about Dr. Scharff's case - did you see my previous message?

Thanks so much! 165.0.87.162 (talk) 10:17, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you rejected the draft about eight months ago, and recently began reviewing it again. Let me note that – in line with Ktkvtsh's subsequent observation (diff) – most of the sources in the article were arbitrarily copied from the page Bardylis. For example, Mann (1977) and Crăciun (2023) are linguistic sources that don't include a single mention of an invasion. Furthermore, at least for the invasion of 360 BC, we already have Battle of Upper Macedon (360 BC) in the mainspace. Lastly, Drmapspetrova, who began the draft and submitted it for review, was indefinitely blocked as a sockpuppet of Fielli about a month ago. – Demetrios1993 (talk) 12:07, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please link the draft. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:41, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The draft can be found here, but you can also visit the page by pressing the aforementioned diff. In any case, you already declined the second submission on 24 March 2025 (diff). – Demetrios1993 (talk) 16:18, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear SafariScribe

I am utterly baffled after the second rejection of this draft

Draft:WePlanet

as an article for creation. I did everything that the previous reviewers asked for

I fail to understand how I could find more references from secondary sources than there already are to this draft : there are SIX references from the Guardian, one from the WSJ and one from the Observer, two from The Star from Kenya, one from the conversation. These references are not only tangentially related to the subject of the article , in fact the first two are exclusively about it. The only references from sources which would not be considered real secondary sources (like GMwatch and references to WePlanet own website) have been added following requests from previous reviewers!!

And again, how can one consider that a world-renowned media like The Guardian, with more than two centuries of existence as a newspaper, would not be independent from an upstart NGO??

Steyncham (talk) 14:48, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Steyncham, reliable sources could also publish paid or promotional articles. Nevertheless, the sources wwere at first dubious, but reviewing again, I found no reason to decline it even when there are many promotional words. Please read WP:WTW. Good luck. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 17:12, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

many thanks for your fast reply and acceptation!

I am still a bit surprised that you added the "promotional" tag, because this had already a remark by a previous reviewer, and I took pains to remove content that might have appeared as promotional

Which are the sentences that still appear to you as being too promotional in tone  ? Steyncham (talk) 18:38, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Steyncham, sorry for the pain, I will later take time to remove the promotional languages in the article. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:42, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why did You reject the article by mountaineer Anton Hetz? It is supposed to be relevant to Wikipedia, and you mentioned that it is contrary to Wikipedia. Could you specify how it is, or at least give a more solid argument for what you mentioned to reject it? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Anton_Hetz_(1830%E2%80%931900),_Austrian_mountain_guide_and_alpinist Countet (talk) 20:11, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:WWIN. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 21:00, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In other cases, similar articles have been written and there has not been any problem. If this is not the case, then with some yes and with others no.

There have been articles in other languages ​​and they have been transferred to the English wiki without any problem Countet (talk) 21:06, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've been editing the article a little more. I look forward to your comment. Countet (talk) 13:43, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Countet, your draft may likely meet notability but not in such state. I found only one source listed in a German National Dictionary and that isn't enough. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:45, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SafariScribe mentions 4 sites in the sources, so they are not enough or are not the ones required by Wikipedia. If it is implemented with only one source, is it possible? While more are found, Countet (talk) 14:11, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
26		Sanford Burnham Prebys (talk)	Add sources
44		2024 Orbic Air Eurocopter EC130 crash (talk)	Add sources
18		BUA Foods (talk)	Add sources
4		Choose Your Masques: Collectors Series Volume 2 (talk)	Add sources
386		Whip (talk)	Add sources
135		Geomatics (talk)	Add sources
39		History of Colchester (talk)	Cleanup
94		Tufnell Park (talk)	Cleanup
170		Chaminade High School (talk)	Cleanup
350		Erythrosine (talk)	Expand
981		Black billionaires (talk)	Expand
38		Cape Wind (talk)	Expand
981		Economy of Nigeria (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
33		Enugu State University of Science and Technology (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
477		Geodesy (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
20		Arriva Southern Counties (talk)	Merge
12		Kreegah bundolo (talk)	Merge
20		Almohad campaign against Portugal (1190–1191) (talk)	Merge
5		Abraham Lilienfeld (talk)	Wikify
23		Henry Paget, 1st Earl of Uxbridge (second creation) (talk)	Wikify
124		Criticism of Greenpeace (talk)	Wikify
42		Grob-Werke (talk)	Orphan
21		Röhm GmbH (Darmstadt) (talk)	Orphan
3		DAT/EM Systems International (talk)	Orphan
8		Kler Çaku (talk)	Stub
121		Lin Bin (talk)	Stub
103		Mark Towle (talk)	Stub
36		Sea of clouds (talk)	Stub
9		The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History (talk)	Stub
169		Skusta Clee (talk)	Stub

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:25, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SafariScribe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "The Lion's Share".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 04:23, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Potatek (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Coat of arms of Pula ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello! You recently denied my AfC submission for non-reliable sources, but left no comment. Is FAME an unreliable source or?

Potatek (talk) 17:22, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The decline box bears the reviewers reason for declining the draft. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:47, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you put that the sources are unreliable, but, like, I'd appreciate it if you could tell me which source exactly. Potatek (talk) 18:25, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @SafariScribe, twice we've had a user come into #wikipedia-en-help after you've left a draft under review for 24+ hours. Both times I've undone your Under Review to give other reviewers a chance to review the drafts. qcne (talk) 17:29, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no problem. I have read almost all of them and have started either to decline or accept per AFC rules, but today, which I planned to clear them, appeared stressful and hectic following the normal Sunday Liturgy for Catholic Christian clergy. Thanks. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 17:50, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. qcne (talk) 17:58, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SafariScribe. The article for improvement of the week is: Ipomoea Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: Cove • Rake (tool) Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 24 March 2025 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • [reply]

Hello @SafariScribe

I have left a message for the person who drafted this to ask whether they would be happy for it to be rescoped to cover the peatland itself not just the project. That would be more notable I think. After renaming the draft I could help them rewrite it. Meanwhile could you possibly tell me a few of the sources you think are unreliable? Chidgk1 (talk) 07:09, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pls link the draft. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:47, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Currently it is still at Draft:Sumatra Merang Peatland Project. No reply yet from User talk:Gambut Pratama so no rush Chidgk1 (talk) 07:59, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This post concerns your rejection of disinformation research draft.

I would like to talk about how you may not be applying correctly the guidelines for notability WP:GNG . My argument is that the fact that you do not personally see the topic discussed is not the criteria in Wikipedia. The criteria is about significant coverage on reliable sources, and academic articles are reliable references as per WP:SCHOLARSHIP

The Draft:Disinformation Research has 34 reliable references, including 25 academic articles on the subject, and if you need, I can add a 20 more. Please note that disinformation is a broad topic, and thus there are several pages on Wikipedia with different angles including disinformation, disinformation attack, Russian disinformation, and even a disinformation publication list, which shows, undoubtedly, that academic research on the topic is a thing that exists and it is notable.

I will fix the draft and resubmit it, and please I kindly ask you to apply the notability criteria for academic subjects. MexFin (talk) 07:11, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MexFin, I am sorry for the late reply, I would rereview. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 10:28, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SafariScribe I really appreciate the time for reviewing the article again. I changed the draft significantly to make sure the academic field (draft:disinformation research) is sufficiently distinct from the phenomenon (disinformation, misinformation, or disinformation attack). It also harmonizes some of the references in publications about disinformation, and provides much more nuanced references with specific page numbers and CC-BY notifications when the quotes are extensive. It now has 50 references, most of which are publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals, demonstrating that the subject is notable in academic and public policy work.

I would appreciate if you take the time to review the draft again. MexFin (talk) 06:47, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	Greetings, SafariScribe. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: LaundryPizza03
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 21:00, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
12		Justin Chart (talk)	Add sources
415		Alaska Highway (talk)	Add sources
176		Shattuck-Saint Mary's (talk)	Add sources
65		Universiti Utara Malaysia (talk)	Add sources
204		Smart ring (talk)	Add sources
3		1959 Jordan League (talk)	Add sources
48		Background to the Gaza war (talk)	Cleanup
53		Buddy Giovinazzo (talk)	Cleanup
34		Bishop's College School (talk)	Cleanup
348		Wiffle ball (talk)	Expand
4		1537 in Sweden (talk)	Expand
4		1657 in Sweden (talk)	Expand
12		157th Air Operations Group (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
19		Love, Saskatchewan (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
66		Chaush (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
17		SS Austria (talk)	Merge
519		Slavic Native Faith (talk)	Merge
34		Lengua de gato (talk)	Merge
9		Deckdisc (talk)	Wikify
2		2019 Sydney International – Men's doubles (talk)	Wikify
7		1986 UEFA European Under-16 Championship (talk)	Wikify
4		Chethan Gowda (talk)	Orphan
2		Carlo Raspagni (talk)	Orphan
2		Acazicolcept (talk)	Orphan
49		Kiambu (talk)	Stub
12		Mohamed Fadzli Hassan (talk)	Stub
4		1585 in India (talk)	Stub
20		Good Grief, Idaho (talk)	Stub
4		1839 Connecticut gubernatorial election (talk)	Stub
3		1902 Nevada State Sagebrushers football team (talk)	Stub

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:25, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Aliko Dangote has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it 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. Gjs238 (talk) 12:40, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The author of Draft:Chicken chop created the article Chicken Chop after you declined the draft submission, with the exact same sources (you stated that they were unreliable). Not sure what to do here. Plant🌱man (talk) 20:43, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Plantman,

When things like that happens, we often redirect the draft to the main article, and then, nominate the article at WP:AFD. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 05:18, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should Chicken chop (main article) be nominated, then? Or do you feel that it warrants its own topic at this point? Plant🌱man (talk) 05:51, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Black in 2023 Hello, SafariScribe. The article for improvement of the week is: Jack Black Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: Ipomoea • Cove Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 31 March 2025 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • [reply]

@SafariScribe Can you help us with the review and possible publication of this article?: Draft:Davi Santiago Etlevs (talk) 19:13, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My brain started to get fried at work and decided to make that article. Also, I checked and added the photo from Commons also. KoRoBeNiKi Medical Coder, chess specialist, retired SSBWiki rollback, hi? 03:37, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]