User talk:Veko: Difference between revisions

Line 106: Line 106:

:If you’d like to redirect it, I’d say be bold and do it. [[Talk:Jacques-Cartier_Park_(Gatineau)#c-DankJae-20250914202100-162_etc.-20250903223500|Only one person opposed it]], and they gave their suggestion on it. It’s a weak consensus with lack of discussion, and you should be bold and just choose a redirect that you think fits best. However, if you’d like you might want to consider opening a new talk page section on it? I’m unsure myself, I’m new to the RM venue. Many thanks, and happy editing! <span style=”background: linear-gradient(90deg, #800080, #444444); -webkit-background-clip: text; color: transparent;”> ”’veko.”’ ([[User:Veko|user]] | [[User talk:Veko|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Veko|contribs]]) he/him </span> 12:15, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

::You’re the closer. It’s up to you to interpret consensus and make the appropriate changes. See [[WP:RMCI]].

::I’ll note that the status quo doesn’t work – [[Jacques-Cartier Park]] should not be a redirect to [[Jacques-Cartier Park (Gatineau)]], seeing as we just determined that it is not the primary topic. [[User:162 etc.|162 etc.]] ([[User talk:162 etc.|talk]]) 17:04, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

This talk page is automatically archived by ClueBot III. Any section older than 7 days, are automatically archived to:

User talk:Veko/Archives/YYYY/MONTH

Where YYYY is the year and MONTH being the full month, like “July” or “September”. Any vandal posts or messages that are not needed will be deleted and will not be saved in the archives. Visit ClueBot III Documentation for more information on how to install Cluebot.

Email me!

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

John Not Real Name (talk) 16:42, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For the AfD nom (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soul Harvest). Let’s wait a week or so I guess and see what happens with it and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicolae (novel). Then we can look at other books – I’ve PRODed all from the series that seem non-notable (no reviews listed, none in ISFDb) – see User:Piotrus/PROD_log#September_2025, but they’ve mostly been dePRODed… _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:06, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You’re welcome! I’m relatively new to assessing notability, and pretty new to assessing notability with books, but it’s experience that I’m trying to gain. Currently, I’m on a NPP trial so this is stuff that I need to learn. I felt quite confident in my choice in nominating and I’m happy to see others agree. Let me know if I make any mistakes; I’ll start looking at the other books and their notability, along to see if I can find any sources which could actually prove their notability. Many thanks, and feel free to contact me again. Happy editing! veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 13:02, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Both AfDs closed as redirect. Would you mind nominating the rest of the books as seen in my PROD log? Maybe you can figure out how to do a batch nomination – I’ve never been able to find the right gadget/script for that… _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:29, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah for sure, I just want to be careful with mass nominations to ensure that WP:BEFORE is still being followed. I’ll get started on that. veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 17:57, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! Thank you very much @Gråbergs Gråa Sång! Appreciate you for still seeing me as a worthy and help editor, it’s a worry I had when disclosing that I am a minor; this is the first time I have done this. It’s a great hope of mine to grow as a contributor, and I don’t want judgement surrounding my age to effect that. Cheers, and happy editing! veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 20:28, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, would you mind reopening and relisting the RM in light of Saad Jatt‘s sock block? — Tenshi! (Talk page) 00:20, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For sure! I saw the sock block, but was unsure of how to proceed with (in the context of a RM) it so I just went ahead and moved it as uncontested. Relisting seems like a fair way to proceed with it, I’ve undone the close and move, as well as relisting it. Cheers, veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 00:30, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, I am a new Wikipedia user, this is my first attempt at making a page. I didn’t know about Talk pages. Here is my query:

I am trying to publish a Wiki page on Dmytro Vinogradov. A Ukrainian concert pianist now living in the United States. He is an important musician, but you have given my the feedback that he does not have enough citations. I have listed many recent ones in the reference list for the page, including videos of some of his concerts and award winning competition performances. Unfortunately most of his publicity is in Ukrainian, Which I don’t speak or write.

What should I do?

Actually, maybe I have fixed it, I have made the citations into in-line references and now the citations are showing correctly in the Reference list. Hopefully this meets the criteria now.
THanks

Hannah Hannahmckeand (talk) 19:06, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for closing the move request, but I think a “no consensus” outcome does not reflect the discussion. Multiple participants (including myself, Qingshan Xue, and others) cited reliable secondary sources such as Dawn and Aaj News that consistently use “Karachi East District,” while no reliable sources at all were presented that use “Gulshan District” for this administrative unit in Pakistan (the few links given referred to Gulshan in Bangladesh and were irrelevant). The objections raised focused on WP:OFFICIALNAME vs WP:COMMONNAME policy interpretation, but even under WP:COMMONNAME, the evidence clearly showed that “Karachi East District” is what reliable sources use. Since the current title is unsupported and unsourced, the stronger consensus was to move the page back to “Karachi East District.” Consensus must always be grounded in core policy, and cannot override key policies such as WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:COMMONNAME. Leaving the page at “Gulshan District” contradicts all three, as the name is neither verifiable in reliable sources nor the common name in use. For these reasons, I respectfully ask you to please reconsider the close. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 19:00, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of that, I’m going to re-open the request for another closer to look at (or for me to come back to it later after I feel more comfortable with a decision). I see your points, however I still feel unsure, and it’s best to leave it open rather than to close it as it is moved even while I’m unsure. Cheers, veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 19:15, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that the RM for the Vcha article was closed, but it doesn’t appear to have been moved to Girlset yet. Could you please take a look and move it accordingly when you get a chance?
Thank you! Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 19:03, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s a technical move which requires a page mover, which I am not. I’ve already sent a notice at the request for technical moves page and I’m monitoring it until a page mover moves it. veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 19:10, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Editor veko, I’m very curious about your decision at Talk:Suranaree Black Cat F.C.#Requested move 31 August 2025. As there was no opposition and 3 editors in support of the page moves, I wonder how you determined there was no consensus? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 21:09, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, editor veko, for this edit! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 12:09, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You’re welcome! On a second look, I made a mistake on determining consensus, which I’m still getting the hang of (I’m getting better at it though), and feedback like this really helps. Happy editing! veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 12:16, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Veko moved page Wellington Central (New Zealand electorate) to Bay of Plenty (electorate) in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bay_of_Plenty_(electorate)&diff=prev&oldid=1313313080. That’s a big mistake, obviously. Please fix it as soon as possible. Nurg (talk) 22:35, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for telling me, I’ve sent technical requests to fix it. veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 23:54, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Nurg (talk) 01:59, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for acting as closer in this discussion.

Are you also in favour of following my recommendation and retargeting Jacques-Cartier Park to Jacques-Cartier National Park? 162 etc. (talk) 01:18, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you’d like to redirect it, I’d say be bold and do it. Only one person opposed it, and they gave their suggestion on it. It’s a weak consensus with lack of discussion, and you should be bold and just choose a redirect that you think fits best. However, if you’d like you might want to consider opening a new talk page section on it? I’m unsure myself, I’m new to the RM venue. Many thanks, and happy editing! veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 12:15, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You’re the closer. It’s up to you to interpret consensus and make the appropriate changes. See WP:RMCI.

I’ll note that the status quo doesn’t work – Jacques-Cartier Park should not be a redirect to Jacques-Cartier Park (Gatineau), seeing as we just determined that it is not the primary topic. 162 etc. (talk) 17:04, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply