User talk:RebeccaGreen/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:RebeccaGreen. 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.

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Gwen Kelly. Thanks! Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 15:43, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Gwen Kelly, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Legacypac (talk) 16:36, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dress-up, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cowboys and Indians (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) 10:34, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Elsie Burrell, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

-- RoySmith (talk) 21:28, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Hilarie Lindsay, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

JC7V-talk 21:04, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Patricia Easterbrook Roberts. Thanks! DGG ( talk ) 00:00, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

On this well-intentioned suggestion of yours: I shall be surprised if the Frank Corley article is deleted. And I suppose that some editor somewhere might take saving a disputed article to one's own sandbox as a concession of defeat. (Also, it may not be a good idea to keep in one's sandbox a draft for an article on a subject whose notability isn't already clear.)

The author of an article at AfD might be wise to save their draft to a text file on their hard drive. But advice to do so really isn't necessary, because it's easy to ask an admin (perhaps the one who deleted the article after an AfD) to restore the article to a sandbox. (Unless, of course, the article was a copyright violation, was potentially libelous, etc etc -- but this article isn't problematic in any of these ways.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:50, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, I am glad to know that an admin can easily restore a deleted article. I am surprised, though, that you say that keeping a draft in one's sandbox when the subject's notability isn't already clear may not be a good idea. I thought that the sandbox was intended for drafting articles, and how is the subject's notability to be agreed by editors until after it has been submitted as a draft for approval? The writer of the article presumably believes that the subject is notable, and may even have attempted to establish that with information and references that they hope conform to Wikipedia guidelines about notability. But having seen proposed AfD about subjects which clearly meet Wikipedia's guidelines (eg presumed notability given certain facts or achievements) - I could not presume that a subject whose notability I think I've clearly established is also considered notable by reviewers and editors. RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:48, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

If this article were deleted, you'd certainly have the right to continue editing it in your sandbox. Yes, you could edit it there if you preferred. Or anyone could, in their own sandbox. -- Hoary (talk) 12:30, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Patricia Easterbrook Roberts, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Missvain (talk) 07:07, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Gisella Loeffler, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Missvain (talk) 17:19, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Joan Craven (2), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Missvain (talk) 17:28, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

To Rebecca, thank you for all your articles and contributions, and information on Maggie Calloway, silent film star, did you find anything on Helen Rowland, IMDb states she passed away in 1978, although this is not a reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.42.39.16 (talk) 12:18, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Midwest Herald. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. TJRC (talk) 19:59, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

The article was nominated for PROD. RebeccaGreen (talk) 20:05, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Doesn't matter. Don't post talk in the article, post it in the associated talk page. TJRC (talk) 01:32, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello, RebeccaGreen. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

You removed the proposed deletion template on Teppo Hauta-aho and gave as a reason in your edit summary "The Open Music Library shows 23 articles about Teppo Hauta-Aho, so there are plenty of sources to draw on". I try to avoid using sources that force readers to register with a web site if they want to check a citation. Sources ought to be more easily accessible. Do you know of any other sources for this article?"
Vmavanti (talk) 18:20, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

• Reply I have not looked. WP:SOURCEACCESS states "Some reliable sources may not be easily accessible. For example, an online source may require payment, and a print-only source may be available only in university libraries. Rare historical sources may even be available only in special museum collections and archives. Do not reject reliable sources just because they are difficult or costly to access." Deletion cannot be uncontroversial when there are sources available in conformity with WP:GNG, and may well be other sources. RebeccaGreen (talk) 00:25, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

How do I access the sources at Open Music Library? I created an account. But when I click on an article I'm taken to Proquest. Is that a paid site? Do I need an account there, too? It's good that you quoted the rules to me. But my main concern is the reader. Readers don't want to jump through hoops. The citations ought to be fairly accessible, otherwise there is no point in having them. Do you have much experience with the Open Music Library and ProQuest? Was your experience through a school or library or neither? How thoroughly have you looked at the articles in the list of sources to know whether they are reliable? I have to see more than a list of titles. I take proposing deletion seriously and I take the removal of the template seriously, as I'm sure you do, too. I have the readers in mind first. So I want to examine these articles one at a time to see how much usable content they have. Thanks for the reply and help.
Vmavanti (talk) 03:29, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Vmavanti, I suggest you take the article to AfD if you want to discuss whether sources should be available online, and whether they are reliable and independent. There is also information in books available through Google books, and he's in Oxford Music Online, and other books about Finnish composers. My point is that this is not an uncontroversial PROD. RebeccaGreen (talk) 03:56, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

If you blocked the Teppo Hauta-aho deletion you are a hero. He's one of the most notable and important and prolific composers for the Double Bass. Thank you! TheMusicExperimental (talk) 14:22, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

TheMusicExperimental, thank you! I know very little about music, but I could see quite easily that there were many sources about him, and I think some editors place far too much reliance on whether sources are accessible online when they consider whether an article meets Wikipedia guidelines. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:29, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

how do you plan to heal the self promotion, the lack of subject's notability, and the massive POV issue created by the fact that Sharoni wrote the first version of her own full article herself and has since been one of its most active editors?

The proposal wasn't by me, but given the complicated mechanics of the AfD process I appreciated it. Don't you think you owe us at least a shred of substantial argument about your veto? I have been asking on the talk page about notability for a month now, without any response whatsoever yet. Wefa (talk) 22:45, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Please review the policy NOTNEWS and reconsider your vote here. Coverage in international news sources in today’s world is not unusual and is typical of a regular news cycle. You have a right to keep your vote as is; I am just offering more information to better understand notability in this situation. Thanks.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 18:20, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for creating Hilarie Lindsay.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process.

Great work!

To reply, leave a comment here and ping me.

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

_signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:48, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Hey, sorry if I'm coming across as a bit gruff at the AFD. I don't mean to imply you are a "bad editor" or anything (that's what I was getting at with the "you're not at fault" bit); the problem is that AFD is often used to defend the kind of things Wikipedia used to be known for back in the mid-00s (articles that are rudimentary and frequently wrong, to paraphrase/quote -- I don't remember his exact words -- Paul Freedman), because when such pages come up there's inevitably a number of "Notable! Keep!" !votes, and it's a pain attempting to deal with them. But I don't know you, so I feel really uncomfortable with the idea that you might think I thought you were such an editor. So here I am.

Anyway: I would like to request that you refrain from making comments like this, since, similarly to how I don't know you, you don't know me well enough to say what some editors might read that comment to mean (that I auto-!vote "delete" in articles on topics I might believe to be notable but have no interest in improving myself). Generally it's not the responsibility of editors !voting on an AFD to sink however many hours it would take into attempting to improve an article before giving up and deciding it can't be helped, and saying "You haven't helped the article" just comes across as needlessly combative. The only reason I said that to you was because I was specifically asked to comment on whether I thought you had improved the article enough to merit changing my !vote, but I never asked you to change your !vote because of some edit I might have made to the article. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 07:48, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your message, and your apology. I was not the one who asked you to comment on what I had done, and I did not ask you to change your vote, either. As I'm sure you gathered, I did not like the remark you made ("it's never a good sign ...."), but I should have walked away at that point. I have since decided not to take any further part in that AfD or any work on that article, and I will certainly attempt to refrain from making any such comments in future. RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:36, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

		A glass of Thandai for you
		Here is a glass of Thandai for you. Thandai is a traditional Indian cold drink prepared with a mixture of almonds, fennel seeds, watermelon kernels, rose petals, pepper, vetiver seeds, cardamom, saffron, milk and sugar. Here is something for your good work with some of the Biography AfDs, your well reasoned comments with evidence. Cheers Thank you. DBigXrayᗙ 15:29, 14 December 2018 (UTC) For more Indian dishes, visit the Kitchen of WikiProject India.

Nice job sourcing Elizabeth O. Hiller E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:30, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For WP:HEYMANN upgrades and dignity under fire during this inexplicable series of AfD nominations of notable early 20th century writers and artists. E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:59, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

	The Special Barnstar
	For unearthing great references on the AfD for Legendary Heroes of Africa. Strong work. Ifnord (talk) 04:09, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

I fully support WP:BITE and drafting, but that doesn't change my prodding logic. If the reviewing admin (or you) feel that something can be draftified instead of being deleted, be bold and move it. If you just remove the prod due to WP:BITE, that I feel is a bit of an abuse of BITE, since the next step is now a potential waste of community's time with a full AfD. PS. My first article on Wikipedia, ~15 year ago, was deleted, and that was made me stick around :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:54, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I am fairly new myself, and I was not aware that I could move an article to a draft. I will look up how to do it. Is there a reason why it cannot be done now, without going to AfD? Or could it be moved to a draft if the creator of the article agreed? RebeccaGreen (talk) 09:00, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	thank you! Олег Черкасский (talk) 18:20, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

This is puzzling. valereee (talk) 19:21, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Maybe a born deletionist? ;-) Seriously, though, I think there are big differences between what generalists and specialists see as notable. The recent earthquake deletions spring to mind, being based on the Wikiproject Earthquakes not documenting earthquakes that don't fit a set of criteria they have determined (and apply somewhat subjectively, to my mind), even though they are not policy - and then consider that "not documenting" actually means deleting a lot of articles that others consider meet WP:GNG. RebeccaGreen (talk) 19:32, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

lol it appears to be professional jealousy valereee (talk) 12:20, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

	Wishing you and yours a Merry Christmas and a happy, healthy and prosperous New Year 2019!
	Hi RebeccaGreen! Thank you for all the hard work and effort you put into Wikipedia. God bless! Onel5969 TT me 14:36, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

	The Special Barnstar
	You are my idol; You always active on AFD for women; So proud for your work!!! I'm from Myanmar. This barnstar for you <3 Mmcele (talk) 10:05, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		Having just closed a third AfD as "Keep per WP:HEY with thanks to RebeccaGreen" I realised you were most definitely due for a barnstar! Nosebagbear (talk) 10:42, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, RebeccaGreen, and welcome to Women in Red. From the two informative biographies you have already contributed, it looks as if you will be a useful member our project. Please let me know if you run into any difficulties or need assistance. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 17:44, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

January 2019, Volume 5, Issue 1, Numbers 104-108 Happy New Year from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual editathons. January events: Women of War and Peace Play! January geofocus: Caucasus New, year-long initiative: Suffrage Continuing global initiative: #1day1woman2019 Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list Image attribution: Nevit Dilmen (CC BY-SA 3.0)

--Ipigott (talk) 17:46, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Angeles Arrien, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Theroadislong (talk) 21:24, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for creating Elizabeth Backhouse.

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

This page could use an image and an infobox. Thanks!

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

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

Citrivescence (talk) 01:21, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

The article Humber the Hun has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Obscure unhistorical character.

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. PatGallacher (talk) 19:13, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for adding some sources to this article. It's customary to give reasons when removing a PROD (even more so when it's been seconded). Could you state which WP:MUSICBIO criterion/criteria you think she meets, and how? The only possibility I see is #1, but there's almost nothing on her that's not very local, promotional, probably self-penned, or her commenting about her notable family members (i.e. not actually about her), even after the sources you've added. EddieHugh (talk) 22:28, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

• I usually leave a reason when removing a PROD, but in this case, realised that the 7 days had expired, so removed it immediately. You say the JazzPolice 2016 source is not reliable because the same text appeared on a TicketWeb listing. The event that listing was for was AFTER the JazzPolice piece, and JazzPolice had also reviewed her several years before. Promotional texts like ads and ticket sale websites often copy text from independent reviews. I think at the very least this should go to AfD - she may or may not meet WP:MUSICBIO, but she may meet WP:GNG. RebeccaGreen (talk) 22:50, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. From some of the JazzPolice wording, I'm not convinced that was genuinely independent coverage, despite there being an author's name on the piece... I used to use JazzPolice, but it's gone downhill & I don't see any info about itself online to investigate whether it counts as a WP:RS. Anyway, are you likely to add anything else to the article? I don't want to go down AfD unless I really believe there's not enough out there to warrant keeping it. EddieHugh (talk) 23:02, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

I have found a couple of other references, one from Musical America in 1987, about an opera she was in (some verification of that section), and one saying she teaches at West Bank School of Music in Minneapolis (additional bio info, not for notability). I could also add some quotes from reviews (eg La Hora del Blues "one of the most delicate melodical voices with an excellent coloful range"). RebeccaGreen (talk) 23:19, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Ok, add what you have & that'll give me a better picture. I'm not sure how good a source La Hora del Blues is either, but it might be acceptable, without doing much for notability. Do you use proquest or similar as a search starting point? Your ability to find things seems more than standard search engine-based. EddieHugh (talk) 14:34, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi EddieHugh, sorry I didn't get to add any more until today. I have now done so, and will see what others think - You may well be right. I don't use Proquest - I do have access to various databases through the National Library of Australia (as I think you have seen), and I subscribe to the British Newspaper Archive and Newspapers.com. But I found most of the sources I added here through Google searches, using her name, the names of others she performed with or places she performed, and also using the word 'review' translated into languages like French, Spanish and German. Searching on a variety of combinations brings up different search results - and I also look further than just a few pages of results, something I sometimes see people saying in AfD nominations ("no results found in the first X number of google results"), as if that means there's nothing to be found. I wish I had access to print copies - online searches are great for sources that have been digitised or indexed, but so much is either not yet digitised, or if created digitally, has been removed or not saved when a website is upgraded .... Anyway, I have done the best I can on this article, I think, so will leave it to others to decide if she is in any way notable. RebeccaGreen (talk) 03:41, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. It's the sort of thing we shouldn't keep (tens/hundreds of millions of people would have an article if her coverage were enough), but yes, see what others think. Interesting on the sourcing: I don't use other languages, but do sometimes add other words to the name ('review', 'interview', titles of recordings or places, etc) too. If you haven't already, have a look at The Wikipedia Library Card Platform: you might not need any of it, but it could be useful to fill in some gaps in what you can access digitally. EddieHugh (talk) 13:01, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Expressing my awe as you contribute one outstanding WP:HEYMANN upgrade after another to poorly sourced pages on notable persons and things. E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:59, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

February 2019, Volume 5, Issue 2, Numbers 107-111 Happy February from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual editathons. February events: Social Workers Black Women February geofocus: Ancient World Continuing initiatives: Suffrage #1day1woman2019 Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage: Socialites Twitter - Forgotten African American Suffragists Women in Red image uploads to Commons Image attribution: Johntex (CC BY-SA 3.0) Subscription options: English language opt-in International opt-in Unsubscribe --Rosiestep (talk) 20:10, 26 January 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Hi. To categorize Articles for deletion discussions, you may find User:Enterprisey/delsort useful. feminist (talk) 08:26, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Johnnie Hines Watts Prothro and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Johnnie Hines Watts Prothro, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CatcherStorm ^talk 11:36, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello, RebeccaGreen! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! CatcherStorm talk 11:36, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

...that after all your wonderful HEY work, you couldn't save Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rebecca Green ;)

Nosebagbear (talk)

Oh, what a pity! That must have been listed before I started looking at AfDs, so I hadn't even seen it :'( My poor namesake, I wonder if she could have been saved? ;-) RebeccaGreen (talk) 23:38, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Even more disappointing, I have just found the article on Deletionpedia, and it really needed a HEY job! And I have easily found two lengthy sources just by googling - one published in 2016, one published four days after the AfD was closed :'( Maybe I'll try creating a new article sometime. Thanks for drawing it to my attention! RebeccaGreen (talk) 23:53, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Johnnie Hines Watts Prothro, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:54, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for correcting the many mistakes made in the list of film credits translated from the German article of Claudia Lössl! Enjoy your bubble tea! Lafayette Baguette talk 02:10, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

It would be good to have your thoughts on Gerina Dunwich. Seems very borderline to me.--Pontificalibus 09:56, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Great job, thanks for looking.--Pontificalibus 12:43, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, I was honoured that you asked. I was a bit surprised that it closed as Keep so quickly. I removed some unnecessary content from the article - it still needs editing, but is not a priority for me. Certainly it would be good to add the reference you found to her being a "world-renowned authority on felidomancy"! RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:54, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

		March 2019, Volume 5, Issue 3, Numbers 107, 108, 112, 113 Happy Women's History Month from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual events: March: Art+Feminism & #VisibleWikiWomen Geofocus: Francophone Women Continuing initiatives: Suffrage #1day1woman
		Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: English language opt-in International opt-in Unsubscribe --Rosiestep (talk) 22:09, 18 February 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Nice work on that! Thank you.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:35, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

can be effectively weaponized to game the system is quite different from you're gaming the system. The former is mentioning a possibility that might stem from such closures; whilst the latter is a direct aspersion. ∯WBG^converse 16:29, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:Nosebagbear submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

I nominate RebeccaGreen to be Editor of the Week for their relentless and outstanding work in rescuing articles at risk of deletion at AfD. From October 2018, RebeccaGreen has turned AfD into an avalanche of struck deletes and closes saying "Keep, per WP:HEYMANN, thanks to RebeccaGreen". Not satisfied with merely finding sources, she resolves everything from quotes, references, content, typos & wiki-links for at-risk articles and, in so doing, presents us and our readers with a retained and improved result. Just a few examples of Articles she has rescued include: Carmen L. Browne (AfD), Elizabeth O. Hiller (AfD), Jacque Batt (AfD) and Mary R. Bassett (AfD). These are living examples that, while it might be hard to improve an at-risk article, it is highly rewarding. Her attitude is kind and welcoming, no matter which side of the debate you are on. She improves the whole discussion for all involved. A Linguist, family historian, dolls house collector, researcher and someone that has been aware of women's issues in Australia since the early 1970s.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}

This editor makes women Blue

RebeccaGreen

Editor of the Week for the week beginning March 17, 2019

Proud member of WikiProjectFeminism and WikiProject Women writers, Rescues articles at risk of deletion at AfD. A kind and welcoming attitude that always improves the discussion for all involved.

Recognized for

being active on topics about women

Notable work(s)

Carmen L. Browne (AfD), Elizabeth O. Hiller (AfD), Jacque Batt (AfD) and Mary R. Bassett (AfD)

Submit a nomination

Thanks again for your efforts! ―Buster7 ☎ 06:14, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

• Kudos again for both the work mentioned here and everything else we can see above - plus, I'm confident, a bunch more that's gone unmentioned :) Nosebagbear (talk)

I removed it out of the John C Cawthon article. It is one biography per page but banned editor Billy Hathorn has done similar things on at least 3 other occasions and I removed those also. Feel free to create a article on Elenora if you want. I have no opinion on her notability....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 19:57, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

If you have a chance, could you look at the article on Evelyn Alcide? It could use some ref searching. I found a few but think there are likely more.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 12:27, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Can you wikify and add the ref for that second award? TIA. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:46, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your work fixing up / rescuing the Charlotte Nasmyth article I added. You've restored my faith in Wp editing. Chaikney (talk) 12:21, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

You've got a good eye for sourcing, so thought it might be of use to you. Any interest? Read over Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes and let me know what you think! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:54, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

You removed speedy Deletion Noticle from Kaushalendra Singh that you think Notable, so, improve article by adding some more news article. Article Currently Move to Draft Space. tuxr 15:06, 24 March 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuxr (talk • contribs)

Please Don't Change to Article Space without improvement! The article Draft:Kaushalendra Singh need additional Citation for Verification. Add some More references or news article, then that will be acceptable. tuxr 17:23, 24 March 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuxr (talk • contribs)

You appear to be a new editor, with a total of 140 edits. Moving an article to draft space that several editors have worked on, and which is not new, just because you don't think it is good enough, is not an appropriate action. See WP:DRAFTIFY for what to do when moving an article to draft space, and particularly:

Requirements for page movers

To unilaterally move an article to draft space, you should:

• notify the author (this is facilitated by the script User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js),
• be accountable for your draftification decisions per the standard described at Wikipedia:Administrators#Accountability.

Other editors (including the author of the page) have a right to object to moving the page, and to have the matter discussed at WP:AfD. If an editor raises an objection, move the page back to mainspace and list at AfD."

I have objected to moving the page to draft space, so the appropriate action is to nominate the article for deletion at AfD, not to simply move it back to draft space. RebeccaGreen (talk) 17:41, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) - And being the mayor of a city with over 1,000,000 population (which clearly has enough references to prove) is pretty much a guarantee that the AfD would be speedily closed as a keep.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:48, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

FYI I came across the draft for Sally Smart and moved to article space. I went to notify AngusWOOF, as he had declined it. In looking at the edit history, I saw that it was you who added all the great citations. She clearly meets WP:Artist as she is in multiple museum collections, but you know that.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:41, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! Yes, I was aware that she meets WP:Artist - I was trying to add more about her work (having a lot of quotes and trying to pull out the essence), so having it moved to mainspace has spurred me on to put in something about her later work, and tidy up the final paras of that section. Cheers, RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:10, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

April 2019, Volume 5, Issue 4, Numbers 107, 108, 114, 115, 116, 117 Hello and welcome to the April events of Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual events: New topics: Gender studies / United Nations / Dance Geofocus: Portuguese-speakers Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: Opt-in (EN-WP) / Opt-in (international) / Unsubscribe

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

(Please excuse this post if it is a duplicate!)

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		Thanks for your work in improving Francine McKenna and saving it from the AfD!  Mailman9  (talk)  19:34, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Time and time again I assess AfDs to close and think "oh look, Rebecca's improved the article". For that, here is a barnstar. Have you ever thought about following in this editor's footsteps? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:09, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, RebeccaGreen! I realise I am writing from an IP-number, but I would like to thank you for your contribution to the article of Therese Kamph. Perhaps the article of Helena Eldrup could also be of interest? It has been questioned by the same editor, but it does have sources and should be notable, but as an IP-number, I feel I have very little weight, so I thought there would be no harm in mentioning it for a proper user. Have a great day!--92.35.227.48 (talk) 10:38, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

==

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Keep on being working hard! Lubbad85 (☎) 17:44, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

==

May 2019, Volume 5, Issue 5, Numbers 107, 108, 118, 119, 120, 121 Hello and welcome to the May events of Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual events: New topics: "May" women / Mayors / Environentalists Geofocus: CEE countries Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:17, 27 April 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Any particular reason this is still in draftspace? I appreciate the article needs more work, but as it stands, I can't see why it would get deleted at AfD having done a quick news search, and for that reason it should probably be put into mainspace. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:17, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Ritchie333, I have now moved it to mainspace. There was no real reason - perhaps I intended to source more references or otherwise improve it, or hoped that others who saw it at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Drafts#New_Additions would do so, but as you say, that can happen in mainspace. Thanks again! Cheers, RebeccaGreen (talk) 00:06, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

User:RebeccaGreen You commented but didn't vote on the AFD If you intend to vote, it should be in bold. Hope all is well. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:10, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For all the work you do creating and expanding articles to make them good. E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:53, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

		The Citation Barnstar
		This Citation Barnstar is bestowed upon you for your exceptional work in referencing Carolyn Banks. Thank you for being an awesome Wikipedian! gidonb (talk) 23:49, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

As you can probably tell, I know Sara Dowse. It is very impressive the work you did on her Wikipedia article against deletion threats. I am trying to back fill with a number of folk in the artificial life community who continue to have Wikipedia pages but may be subject to the same kind of deletion. Thanks again for your efforts finding the links. As I noted, I don't see these links being used by the deletion group. It seems completely independent of the actual work I have done and how this work has been recognized. Would you advise that I just appeal this to a different admin? Barbalet (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

The tone of things seem to have improved. Barbalet (talk) 21:24, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

RebeccaGreen Most of the articles you referenced are found here:

http://nobleape.com/int/ http://www.flipcode.com/interviews/nervana/

The articles here are competitive peer reviewed:

http://www.nobleape.com/sim/#Academic

This is the Apple referenced article:

http://nobleape.com/sim/shark_optimize.pdf

There are also independent audio interviews:

https://twit.tv/shows/floss-weekly/episodes/31

https://web.archive.org/web/20051112214331/www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/science/thematerialworld_20030327.shtml http://www.longfunk.com/data/na_bbc4.mp3

https://shrinkrapradio.com/126-shrink-rap-radio-live-3-artificial-life-and-artificial-intelligence/

https://geekspeak.org/episodes/2018/11/06

I'm not sure if these are useful sources for your rewrite.

I'm interested in your thoughts on creating one combined article versus maintaining the two previous articles. Would it be that Tom Barbalet would point to Noble Ape? Anyway, all when you have time. Thanks once again. Barbalet (talk) 19:38, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

June 2019, Volume 5, Issue 6, Numbers 107, 108, 122, 123, 124, 125 Check out what's happening in June at Women in Red: Virtual events: New topics: Pride / Royals / Space Geofocus: Mediterranean Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:42, 22 May 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Hi, at the recent AfD you mentioned that The Golden Age of Steam Locomotive Building might have something on Borrows. I've been looking and I can't find anything in there (sadly there's no index, which is inexcusable these days but annoyingly common). Do you have any hint as to where it might be? Thanks Andy Dingley (talk) 11:49, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for looking. Unfortunately, I don't - there is no preview on Google Books, so although it came up when I searched for Edward Borrows and Sons, I couldn't see any text or page number, etc. The article looks much more substantial and better sourced now, so unless you happen to come across anything, I wouldn't worry too much. (Unindexed books are very frustrating, especially when they are not available digitally at all!) RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:06, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Do you know what you might have been searching for?

It's not a brilliant book - it's a recent publication by the NRM, so as is typical it's well illustrated with photographs from their archive, but the content is thin and the errors start from the very first sentence! I'd forgotten I had a copy as I haven't read it yet, I just happened to pick it up in a closing-down sale. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:38, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for creating May Hollinworth.

User:FULBERT while reveiwing this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:

Nice article on this important person who had not previously had an article on her.

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

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

FULBERT (talk) 18:00, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi

Are your edits to Etta Benjamin as follows: red=deletion; green - remains/not deleted? Tiatiabobia (talk) 06:30, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Wikipedia shows edits as red for deletions and green for additions, on mobile phones. On laptops and pcs, deletions are highlighted in buff and additions in pale blue. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:52, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hugh Dixson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Evening News (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) 12:46, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

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

Bridges in Bihar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to James Meadows Rendel

Koilwar Bridge (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to James Meadows Rendel

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:09, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello, we've been in various AfD's together (usually on opposite sides!), but I highly respect your diligent work, especially your talent for finding sources. I was wondering if you would be willing to look for sources on Brit Simon Stewart (musician). There is only one in the article and other then where one can buy his CD, I can't find any other sources independent of the subject. I'm thinking about nominating this article for deletion, but want to make sure it truly merits deletion first. Thank you for any help you may be able to provide. Sincerely, Newshunter12 (talk) 10:19, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Newshunter12, thank you very much for the compliments! I have been able to find very little about this musician so far. I have found that someone called Simon Stewart released an album, Daytime, on Hudson Music in 2008 , and it seems other albums too - but I'm not even sure that's the same person. If it is the same person, then he might meet WP:MUSICBIO #5, if the labels he recorded on were considered some "of the more important indie labels" (the one mentioned in the article, Longman Records, doesn't (yet) have a WP article, and neither does the label that the 2008 album was released on, Hudson Records). So that's a lot of ifs, and no reviews that I have found so far. Given that the article has been tagged since 2010, I think taking it to AfD s quite reasonable! If I find do anything else, I can add it to the article and mention it in the AfD ;-) Cheers, RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:39, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your research and help. With your guidance in mind, I have nominated the article for deletion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon Stewart (musician). Thanks again :) Newshunter12 (talk) 18:48, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

July 2019, Volume 5, Issue 7, Numbers 107, 108, 126, 127, 128 Check out what's happening in July at Women in Red... Virtual events: New topics: Sports / Education Geofocus: Microstates Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman Initiatives we support: Atari Women University of Edinburgh 1000 Women in Religion Editor feedback: Check out the conversations regarding Sports, Sports, Sports! Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:41, 25 June 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:56, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi RebeccaGreen, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! œ^™ 04:18, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

I have granted the "rollbacker" permission to your account. After a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, contact me and I will remove it. Good luck and thanks. œ^™ 04:18, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much, œ! This is a great honour, and a surprise, as I had read that the Autopatrolled right was usually granted after creation of 25 articles, and I have only created 7 from scratch so far (plus I'm not sure how many improved from rejected drafts). I will read up on Rollback and how to use it (and not use it). Many thanks again, RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:28, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Only after 25 articles?? Hmm.. oh well ;) -- œ^™ 03:11, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

• I'd just like to say that I'd count any brushed-up draft improved to the point that it's accepted as equivalent to writing a full article for the purpose of demonstrating that warrant autopatrolling. I've seen several of them and they are major improvements. Nosebagbear (talk) 20:21, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your commentary and assistance re: Waekerlé AfD. I will continue to pursue those lines of thought, having another voice in there is very helpful for me as I continue to verify more sources. TheMusicExperimental (talk) 14:20, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

You're welcome. As I said above, I know little about music, but I dislike seeing editors voting to delete when they haven't considered all sources and notability guidelines. Sometimes one particular guideline fits well, other times (it seems to me, and I've seen other editors do the same), a bit of mix and match works best. WP:CREATIVE is not specifically for musicians, although of course they are creative professionals, and WP:MUSICBIO #1 is similar though doesn't specifically mention reviews. Good luck finding sources about her, or that show clearly that she meets other criteria of WP:MUSICBIO, etc. I will come back to !vote. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:36, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

	The Civility Barnstar
	Fro calm, polite explanations of a policy to the nominator of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Surrealist Women . E.M.Gregory (talk) 09:51, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, @E.M.Gregory:! I looked up that user's talk page, and decided there was no point in getting into discussion of their intentions or mine, so just reiterated what WP:V says about access. On that point - thank you also for looking up one of the references in Shireen Ahmed - I agree that that source, which just cites Ahmed, does not add anything re notability. I see that that AfD has closed as No Consensus. RebeccaGreen (talk) 17:19, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Template:Did you know nominations/Pamela Nadell. As you had made some edits to this article, which had been nominated for DYK by another editor, your input is appreciated. Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 13:25, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I see all of your hard work checking WP:RS. Lightburst (talk) 15:12, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

On 25 July 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article May Hollinworth, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Australian theatre director and former chemistry demonstrator May Hollinworth was described as "a wizard with lighting effects"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/May Hollinworth. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, May Hollinworth), 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.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions with User:RebeccaGreen. 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.