User talk:Docmoates
In this article we will address the topic of User talk:Docmoates, which has sparked great interest and debate in recent years. User talk:Docmoates has aroused the curiosity of researchers, academics and the general public, due to its relevance in different areas of society. From its impact on the economy, politics, culture, to its influence on people's daily lives, User talk:Docmoates has become a central topic of discussion and reflection. Along these lines we will analyze different perspectives and opinions about User talk:Docmoates, with the aim of offering a broad and enriching vision of this topic that is so relevant today.
| This is Docmoates's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives (index): 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 1 hour  |
 Archives (Index) |
Hi Docmoates. I reverted your closure of this AFD.
One reason is that it was just recently relisted, and another was that it wasn't closed properly. I think it would be best to not have a relatively new account close this, since its within 3 separate CTOPs. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 16:40, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- The article is within WP:CT/BLP, WP:CT/AP, and WP:CT/GENSEX. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 16:41, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- @45dogs Apologies, just seeing this. Was trying to fix my mistake. It should be good now. I believe it is closed properly. I don't believe the close is likely to be controversial and there was a consensus. I am sorry for my template mistake. Docmoates (talk) 16:47, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- Its fine. Please sign the closure with {{subst:NAC}}. I will just warn you that I wouldn't be surprised if it is challenged. But it could go without issue. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 16:50, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- I don't think this was a good choice for a first close. Per WP:NACD:
Close calls and controversial decisions are better left to admins
. – bradv 17:09, 11 December 2025 (UTC)- Also, you already proposed a move on the talk page. That makes you WP:INVOLVED with respect to any administrative actions. I'm reverting your close. – bradv 17:12, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Bradv - Let's only make statements that are accurate. I was not involved in the Afd. The move request was a separate action. I did not suggest or vote move or redirect in the Afd. With there being nearly 20 keep and 12 delete, I am not sure how it meets WP:NACD as it seems like a consensus not controversial but to each their own, I won't argue. I just ask that in the future you either be directly honest or expand your edit summary to include the full action. Docmoates (talk) 17:17, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- You're WP:INVOLVED with respect to the article. Please read the links I've posted here. – bradv 17:20, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Bradv I did read it and it says "should not act as administrators in disputes in which they have been involved" and I was not involved in the Afd dispute per the policy. It does not say involved in any actions on the page only the particular dispute which was the Afd not the move. Docmoates (talk) 17:22, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- You're WP:INVOLVED with respect to the article. Please read the links I've posted here. – bradv 17:20, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Bradv - Let's only make statements that are accurate. I was not involved in the Afd. The move request was a separate action. I did not suggest or vote move or redirect in the Afd. With there being nearly 20 keep and 12 delete, I am not sure how it meets WP:NACD as it seems like a consensus not controversial but to each their own, I won't argue. I just ask that in the future you either be directly honest or expand your edit summary to include the full action. Docmoates (talk) 17:17, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- Also, you already proposed a move on the talk page. That makes you WP:INVOLVED with respect to any administrative actions. I'm reverting your close. – bradv 17:12, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- @45dogs Apologies, just seeing this. Was trying to fix my mistake. It should be good now. I believe it is closed properly. I don't believe the close is likely to be controversial and there was a consensus. I am sorry for my template mistake. Docmoates (talk) 16:47, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
I would suggest everyone continue to WP:Assume good faith and let this discussion wind down. Docmoates wasn't aware of how broadly WP:INVOLVED can be perceived to apply to contentious topics. His closure is reasonable and was made in good faith, but the community prefers admin closures in these circumstances. — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 17:47, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
December 2025
Hi, Docmoates. Thanks for patrolling new pages. I've declined your deletion request for a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to read the new tutorial for patrollers, criteria for speedy deletion, and particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion or proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Thanks! ~2025-31245-28 (talk) 19:54, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
Pending changes reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
See also:
- Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
- Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes#Requirements to accept an edit, when to accept an edit
* Pppery * it has begun... 00:56, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Pppery Thank you! Docmoates (talk) 02:51, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Sarah Hollenstein Career and Technology Center requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, as it exhibits signs of having been generated by an AI model with no clear human review. Text produced by these applications can be unsuitable for an encyclopedia and output must be carefully checked. For further information, see the section G15 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think these signs were incorrectly identified and you assert that you did carefully check the content, 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. Additionally – if you would like to create an article but find it difficult, please ask for help at the Teahouse. JTtheOG (talk) 04:43, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Seeing all the work done since the tag, I've declined the speedy. Thanks! BusterD (talk) 11:18, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Eagle Mountain High School
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Eagle Mountain High School requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, as it exhibits signs of having been generated by an AI model with no clear human review. Text produced by these applications can be unsuitable for an encyclopedia and output must be carefully checked. For further information, see the section G15 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think these signs were incorrectly identified and you assert that you did carefully check the content, 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. Additionally – if you would like to create an article but find it difficult, please ask for help at the Teahouse. r f q i i talk! 05:27, 13 December 2025 (UTC)