User talk:Joe Roe: Difference between revisions

Welcome to my talk page. Please adhere to the talk page guidelines and particularly the following: Please post your new topic at the bottom of this page. Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end. Please specify a descriptive subject or headline for a new topic and separate subtopics by ===heading=== lines, if needed. Please indent your posts with one more ":" than what you are replying to, i.e. begin with ":" if replying to an existing topic and "::" if replying to a reply. I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or specifically let me know where you'd prefer the reply. ⇒ Start a new Talk topic.

Archives

2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MediaWiki message delivery (talk • contribs) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ser Amantio di Nicolao (talk • contribs)

Hi Joe,

I am not able to move my draft of Alia Gurtov to New Article Status. Would you be able to review the draft and move it for me?

Have I lost the ability/permission to move my drafts to New Articles? Whatever I was doing before, does not seem to work today.

Thanks MauraWen (talk) 02:33, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)@MauraWen: Unless the most unexpected disaster in RfA history happens in the next half hour, Joe may be busy munching on Twiglets and champagne as our newest admin, so in the meantime I have moved your draft. The reason you couldn't is because there was an existing article Alia Gurtov which was a redirect to Underground Astronauts, so somebody without extended permissions wouldn't be able to do it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:34, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I was thinking I'd do a move-over-redirect as my first admin action, but Ritchie snapped it from under me! Thanks for another fine article, Maura. – Joe (talk) 17:44, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You could delete Template:Infobox Student (unless another admin gets there first). And yes, thanks for these articles, Maura - I see you are familiar with Women in Red, which is good to hear. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:59, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seems unlikely that you'll cock up your RFA in the handful of hours that remain (if you're having second thoughts, now's the time to start replacing the Main Page with a slew of profanity, good luck...) so I'm here to extend my congratulations. It's not often that I'll support an RFA where I've never crossed paths with the candidate, but after I looked into your history I couldn't help but tick the box. I reckon you'll do fine, but if you ever need a hand with the new buttons, feel free to ask. Well done! Yunshui ^雲_水 12:15, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Yunshui, I appreciate the support. Happy to join the freakshow! – Joe (talk) 17:51, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations Joe Roe! Your RfA was successful. You are now an administrator on the English Wikipedia. I hope you have just as happy a time editing in the future as you did before your RfA. You may want to look at the admin guide to read up on any tools you are unfamiliar with.

— xaosflux ^Talk 16:56, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Officially :D. I'm sure you'll do great. Remember to collect the free t-shirt that someone is sure to be offering you shortly :) Glad to have you on the team. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:58, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Congratulations and commiserations on becoming an administrator! Take it slow, and feel free to drop me a line if I can help in any way -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 16:58, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Congrats, Joe! If you ever need advice on IP-blocking half of Singapore handling socking cases, you know where to find me GAB^gab 17:05, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Congratulations! Please take a moment to savor your triumph. Done? Great. CSD is this way. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:16, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Great RfA. Now you need to enable 2FA. Please nag me if I haven't posted to Wikiproject archaeology about[1] - I think the project could help. Doug Weller talk 17:34, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Congratulations for adminship !! CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:53, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Congratulations and good luck. Donner60 (talk) 08:44, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys! – Joe (talk) 18:04, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the admin corps, Joe Roe! My name is Sergeant K6ka, and that is spelled out, not pronounced! I am here to inform you that the admin corps ain't the Girl Scouts, so if you're looking for an easy, cushy ride, I'd suggest you resign. If you have decided to take the plunge, welcome aboard! Here's your mop; now go and mop the parking lot until it's so clean the General will be blinded by the reflection! The admin corps strongly recommends one drink: it's coffee, and it'll keep you going from 5am wakeup till dusk. Good luck with the mop, good sir! —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 17:42, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Um... is it too late to change my mind? 😥 – Joe (talk) 18:07, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well done, do also have a look at Wikipedia:What you won't learn in new admin school, never a truer word has been written... Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:23, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

archeological culture

Thank you for quality articles around archeology and its people, such as Margaret Ursula Jones and British Institute in Amman, for Indigenous territory (Brazil), for {{Infobox archaeological culture}} and related images, maps and diagrams, for service from 2006, and now also offering admin service, - Joe, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:49, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Gerda Arendt. I was embarrassed when I looked at the amount of unfinished articles I had before the starting the RfA, so I'm taking it as a bit of a kick up the backside to bring more up to scratch – I'll be trying to catch up to your GA count! – Joe (talk) 18:17, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I never counted GAs, it's just my initials ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:22, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although all admins are welcome to delete constructively on Wikipedia, at least one of your recent deletions, such as the one you performed on the Main Page, did not appear to be constructive and has been undeleted. Please use Jimbo Wales' user page for any test deletions or blankings you would like to make, and read about our main page deletion guideline to learn more about deleting things on this encyclopedia. Thank you. —usernamekiran(talk) 17:51, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, usernamekiran, that was a pretty obvious WP:CSD#G1. – Joe (talk) 18:09, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I think about it; I see it was full of hoaxes, and fictional (made up/imaginative) stuff. Deleting it was a good call. That page really needs a lot of work. See you around Joe. :)
—usernamekiran(talk) 18:14, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Don't delete the Main page today when I am so proud of a DYK that I decorated my talk with it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:25, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations Joe!

Thanks for responding so quickly when you must be very busy today!

MauraWen (talk) 18:41, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, congrats Joe. Good luck. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:29, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well done, Joe. Welcome to the team. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:00, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 20:39, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind words and the advice that you provided to me related to the doubts that I wanted to clarify about the redirects and page moves. You have made me cool and happy with your kindful efforts. Thanks a lot and happy editing.

Abishe (talk) 13:05, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joe Roe. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe,

Thank you for signing up our study to try out our recommender system! Right now, we are still waiting for more participants from other WikiProjects to sign up, so I will let you know when we are ready to provide you the recommendations (aiming at early January), and will let you know how to use it. Thank you! Bobo.03 (talk) 16:55, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you created dab page Golden record and redirected Gold record there. I have no opinion on the dab, other than Gold Record seems like it should be treated consistently, unless the proper noun is really a distinct case? Additionally, there is also the existing dab page Golden Record. Finally, the existing links to Gold record need to be disambiguated after the changed redirect. Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 11:58, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Correction, I see that you only modified Golden record, and redirected Gold record there.—Bagumba (talk) 12:00, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't actually create the disambig, I just came across it on new page patrol and cleaned it up. It seemed a reasonable creation at the time, but I don't have a strong opinion on whether it should remain or not. – Joe (talk) 14:51, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Understandable. In the meantime, BD2412 has reverted the changes, citing lack of evidence for changing a longstanding redirect. Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 18:52, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but it was spelled "Kiev" since the article's very creation. Why change it? --Moscow Connection (talk) 18:14, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note that I didn't make the change in the first place. I just reverted the revert because the reason given wasn't valid ("English name is Kiev"). All other things being equal, I would use Kyiv in articles related to contemporary Ukraine, but it's not a big deal. – Joe (talk) 18:21, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Moscow Connection: – Joe (talk) 18:30, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer "Kiev", but it's not a big deal to me either. --Moscow Connection (talk) 18:34, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see now: [2]. That's who started it. --Moscow Connection (talk) 18:38, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe. I was just checking out your user page, and noticed you recently created a page on Bagshaw Museum. I just thought I'd thank you for that, and mention out of interest that the Bagsahw Museum was the first museum I was ever permanently employed in, way back in 1981. I took up the post of Junior Assistant Curator there at Kirklees, before moving to Tolson Museum before then being asked to return to manage the place in 1985. I remember it was a very big day whenever a very elderly Violet Bagshaw honoured us with a visit in her chauffer-driven car to spent an hour or so having tea with us all! I seem to remember there was a very curious story about either Walter Bagshaw or his brother who had died, but then the train carrying their coffin to the cemetery was involved in an accident and derailment, with his naked corpse being found on the trackside. Very disturbing stuff.

On a completely different matter I would really welcome the advice of an admin on a matter that has been concerning me, so I thought of dropping you or Cullen a note. I've been worrying about a response I gave at the Teahouse today to a young user to this question. They are an Indian 9th Grade student (I assume c.14-15yrs old) who has used their real name as well as naming both parents and their school on their user page. I felt it was appropriate for me to break a few rules and immediately delete these personal details and have recommended they choose a completely different account name. Obviously these personal details still remain in their user page history, which is a worry should they decide to continue using it. I'm not yet familiar enough to be confident of the most appropriate way to guide a brand new user on such a delicate matter. I had thought about referring my concern to WP:ANI or WP:OS, but thought this could just be an over-reaction on my part. I don't want to leave a new user floundering with complex instructions, nor worry them unduly, either. I've done my best, but would welcome a second opinion on whether anything further needs to be done to protect this user. Any help would be appreciated (and useful for me to know too). Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:31, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Small world! Hopefully I didn't make any big mistakes in the article?

I think you're right to err on the side of caution w.r.t. the young editor. I've deleted the old revisions of the page and emailed oversight about it. Other than that I think you've given them sound advice. – Joe (talk) 23:06, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Joe. - that's an immense relief. If they need further guidance on changing to a different username would oversight suggest that to them? Or do we leave it to the user to decide whether they ought to or not? I wouldn't want them changing to a new account name and then being accused of having a sock. I'll leave them a follow-up note to explain what's happened, anyway.

Regarding the Museum, the only thing you missed out was the amazing and immense floor to ceiling diorama of seabirds - guillemots, razorbills and gannets from Bempton Cliffs - which filled one room above my old office. Seems like a lifetime ago, and I guess it actually was! I think it got stripped out sometime in the 1990s. Reading your article again, I'm wondering whether it was one of the Sheards whose corpse was exposed in that train crash. Couldn't find anything online at a quick search, though. I also remember working there at the time we got the most awful pea green 1960s paint stripped off the entire ground floor woodwork to reveal this amazing Canadian pitch pine interior. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:19, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think the username is up to them. If they want to start using a new account it would probably be obvious why, and that they're not sockpuppeting (if checkuser ever came up).

I'll have to visit the museum again and check out the building itself. I haven't been since I was in school – when I wasn't interested in much beyond the cool 'mummy'! – Joe (talk) 10:49, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Given the highly controversial nature of this RfC and its interpretation, as you may know if you are involved in school AfDs, I am asking you to reopen these discussions or close them as no consensus. You cannot discount opinions on this sort of basis. If not, I shall take them to DRV. Thank you. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:27, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can't say I didn't see this coming, but I stand by my close and would prefer to get an independent opinion at DRV. I've seen your "per longstanding precedent and consensus" !vote copy-and-pasted into multiple school AfDs recently, and as I see it that is exactly the kind of circular logic that was discouraged in the WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES RfC. Its close explicitly stated that such arguments "may be discounted when the AFD is closed". Even if it didn't, I judged that the consensus in both of these AfDs was that there were insufficient sources for an article, and ultimately WP:V trumps ancient precedents. – Joe (talk) 10:41, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Quaid School. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:02, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ace School System. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:02, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe,

I submitted Becca Peixotto for review. If its possible for you to review and move the draft to new article status, I can start working on another underground astronaut.

Thanks MauraWen (talk) 23:12, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem Maura,  Done. – Joe (talk) 00:22, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Charles, Prince of Wales. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe,

If you have time to take a look at the Hannah Morris draft and move it to new article, I would appreciate it.

There is another Hannah Morris listed on Wikipedia, so I was not sure how to list Hannah's name in the infobox.

A quick question: I would like to use the same paragraph I put together about the Rising Star experience for each of these women. I know I am not supposed to cut and paste, but the paragraph is my own words, a combination of facts and cited quotes. Can I do that?

I have been changing the paragraph slightly for each astronaut, but I am not sure if that is even necessary or if I should be writing a completely different paragraph for each scientist.

thanks Maura

MauraWen (talk) 16:35, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Maura. Sure thing, I'll move it now & disambiguate the other Hannah Morris article.

Copying within Wikipedia is okay since everything has an open license; just make sure you link to the article you copied from (in this case Becca Peixotto) to maintain the proper attribution.

Just a note of caution with these: I'm not sure that all of the "underground astronauts" are individually notable. They might be – but just make sure you're checking that there are a decent number of sources on each subject as an individual, if you're planning to continue. Thanks. – Joe (talk) 19:42, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Joe,

I assumed all six women were notable because they were on the Women in Red List. I will check the candidates more carefully in the future.

MauraWen (talk) 21:46, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Joe Roe, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
• Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

Outreach and Invitations:

• If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: {{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive

• A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
• Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update:

• ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
• The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Dear Joe, Thank you for your feedback. I am trying to improve it following your instructions. I have also one request. I made a page by mistake which has to be deleted. Can you please do it as an admin?

This is the page to be removed: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Alireza_Mashaghi&redirect=no

Thank you. Plectoneme (talk) 07:29, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, Plectoneme, I've deleted it. Thanks again for your contribution. – Joe (talk) 09:08, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of stories set in a future now past – While there were a larger number of Keep !votes, the majority of them were WP:ILIKEIT or simply asserted GNG satisfaction without providing evidence. I believe the Delete !votes had the stronger policy argument, based on WP:LISTN and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. James (^talk/_contribs) 19:10, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to disagree with that assessment, James. In reading through I was struck that none of the participants actually mentioned WP:LISTN. The majority of the keeps were assertions of notability, whilst the deletes boiled down to an assertion that it was OR. Personally I don't think either of those are very compelling arguments, but the weight of numbers was clearly in favour of keeping the article.

Even if I were to weight the deletes more (which I think would be a bit of a supervote), with those numbers it couldn't be more than a no consensus so the outcome would be the same. – Joe (talk) 20:00, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe,

I submitted the Marina Elliott draft for approval yesterday and got a message this morning. Comment: I can't approve because it exists as a redirect. Sorry Eddie891 Talk Work 14:56, 16 December 2017 (UTC)"

I am not sure if an admin like yourself needs to do something with my draft or I should just wait and the draft will eventually get moved to article.

Also, given your advice about notability, I won't be creating an article for L. Eaves-Hunter.

Is it ok to remove the underground astronauts from the Red List? The list is all blue now except for Eaves-Hunter.

Thanks MauraWen (talk) 16:32, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it just needed an admin to delete the redirect. Eddie could have requested it with {{db-move}}.

Sounds good. I'd go ahead and remove them from the red list. Great work! – Joe (talk) 16:51, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Buffalo, New York. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe,

I have a draft I've been working on and wanted to see if you had any suggestions to get it approved? [[3]]

Lloan (talk) 16:16, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lloan. I'm afraid not; I don't spend my time on articles that have been paid for. My only suggestion would be to give up on the draft, because Wikipedia is not a means of promotion. – Joe (talk) 10:45, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Joe Roe, seems like a subjective view. The article is paid for in the sense that I work for the company. I wasn't given the task to write it, but I did have to disclose that I'm affiliated with the company. Would you then suggest the articles for OrangeTheory Fitness, Planet Fitness, etc. be removed from Wikipedia? These are big companies that people want to know about. Nothing in that article is promoting anything, its informational. Thank you for the helpful input though. ~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lloan (talk • contribs) 15:10, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Lloan: Regardless of the notability of the subject (I have no opinion on FBBC or the other articles you mentioned), would you trust an encyclopaedia where the articles were all written by the subjects themselves, or their employees? I certainly wouldn't, and it baffles me that so many paid/COI editors do not see the issue there. That may be my subjective opinion, but the consensus of the community, very clearly expressed in WP:COI, is that paid editing is undesirable and discouraged. As you've chosen to ignore that and do it anyway, don't be surprised if you find a higher level of scrutiny applied to your edits, or if you encounter other volunteer editors like me who choose not to review or improve paid-for articles. – Joe (talk) 18:21, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:26, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Benito Mussolini. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you declined a speedy deletion nomination because you thought the page was not an example of "Pages in userspace consisting of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals, where the owner has made few or no edits outside of user pages". The page contains nothing except for telling us about the YouTube account of the person who created the page, how many views it has had, and that he is "up and coming". The account has made no edits at all to any page apart from its user page. Can you tell me what you think would be "Pages in userspace consisting of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals, where the owner has made few or no edits outside of user pages"? Breaking sticks (talk) 21:49, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Breaking sticks: A valid U5 candidate would be one that is an unambiguous ("blatant") misuse of userspace. That user page could have been an attempt to promote a YouTube channel (although it didn't link to it). On the other hand, it could simply be the user telling us about themselves, which is a perfectly valid use of userspace and something lots of new editors do in their first few edits. It is hard to tell from just 1-2 lines of text, and in ambiguous cases like that we should always assume good faith, especially where new accounts are concerned. – Joe (talk) 12:09, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

		Welcome to Women in Red's January 2018 worldwide online editathons. New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/64|"Prisoners"]] New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/65|"Fashion designers"]] New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/66|"Geofocus: Great Britain and Ireland"]] Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:13, 27 December 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Instead of deleting the article, wouldn't it have been better if you had reverted it back to my drafts and given me time to modify it? Request you to please give the content in my draft or tell me where would i get the content back.~ ScitDei^{Wanna talk?} 04:37, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ScitDei. The entirety of the article was copied from [4]. We can't host copyright infringing text on Wikipedia, even as a draft. – Joe (talk) 09:24, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]