Hi, I just restored half a dozen items that you deleted, because they are part of an ongoing editathon and do meet the notability criteria.
Topic on User talk:ValterVB
Have you an example? Because an item without sitelink, backlink and reference isn't notable. "editathon" don't mean automatically notable. On wikimedia project we have a lot of deleted pages created during some editathon.
Please get in touch with the organisers of this event if you have doubt about the notability of some of these items, or wait for them to finish working on it.
We don't work in this manner. Organisers , must stay in touch with wikidata. If they want create a lot of item not notable, they must warning before the project. It's impossible search for every item if it is created in a editathon or is not notable. For me aren't not notable, but if they warn the project someone can help them.
Who is the organiser? and where is the page of the editathon?
Hey :)
I talked with the organizer in-person and asked Ash Crow for help. Is there really a huge issue with keeping those few items for a while? We have much larger issues than that and we are pushing away valuable editors and hurting our cause.
The problem is that if we don't know that these items are about something of particular that we must keep also if isn't notable, the risk of cancellation is very high. You can propose a property like "Don't delete before" datatype "date" and when you add reference or sitelink or backlink you can delete. We delete hundreds of item per day and we have 54 admin, it's impossible remember what item delete or what item keep without something that say "keep".
Can we find a way to include an automatic check to see if the item is linked from any Wikimedia project? For those that was visible in page info.
If these items are compiled from some source, why isn't this included in the item?
Jura's solution is a thousand times better :)
A listing on a project does not guarantee that items are notable. A source allows you to control what you are talking about and is easy check with SPARQL if items have source.
I also think that if the user use a list to add data, the user can add source to the item in a very fast way, is much more reliable
these are poets in published anthologies, so they have references and you have done no wp:before. references are not a policy requirement at wikisource.
why are you disrupting efforts to write content? you need to provide some evidence to doubt the notability of these people. you realize that we have many "sum of all paintings" artists, without articles? are they all not notable?
Why not add the references to Wikidata directly?
Do you need help on how to go about to doing that? Maybe Lydia could show you this in the next workshop.
as far as i can tell, there was a book listed in a source qualifier. what makes you think that a referenced statement = notability? clearly it is not the criteria of this editor
i know how to add references, but why should i when the item will get deleted?
Maybe you can follow discussion in RfD
maybe you can follow the notability guideline: "2. It refers to an instance of a clearly identifiable conceptual or material entity. The entity must be notable, in the sense that it can be described using serious and publicly available references."
i.e. we have demonstrated that all of the poets on the list can be "described using publicly available references" therefore, undelete those items that you deleted.
I follow the guideline, indeed there was a source in the item, I checked the source but the source did not mention the poet. I asked in RfD a check for mistake but none answered so I have deleted the item, and also in subsequent discussions, none fixed the problem.
no, you are disrupting a wikimedia meetup, by deleting items that turn our to be notable. as a sign of good faith why don't you undelete "Umm Assa'd bint Isam al-Himyari" who appears here? https://books.google.com/books?id=zXm0DQAAQBAJ&pg=PT13&lpg=PT13&dq=Umm+Assa%27d+bint+Isam+al-Himyari&source=bl&ots=5T0R0EFvmt&sig=A_Sj7Ko9YDht_raEXQgDQ11jApk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiIsYz166vWAhWj7YMKHXDwDawQ6AEIMTAC#v=onepage&q=Umm%20Assa'd%20bint%20Isam%20al-Himyari&f=false
- 29/7: I deleted item
- 9/8: Ashcrow restore item
- 10/8: I open rfd
- 15/8: Jarekt add reference.
- 18/8: I check reference and don't found nothing about the 10thitem, Janūb Ukht ‘Amr dhī-l-Kalb in Classical Poems by Arab Women. Thinking about an error, I ask in RfD and wait for feedback
- 21/8: After one week, none answered so I keep 9 items and delete last.
I don't think that my behaviour is "disrupting" but that who has created item did not care about his fate. And for answer to your last question: I don't know who is "Umm Assa'd bint Isam al-Himyari", this topic is about "Janūb Ukht ‘Amr dhī-l-Kalb"
you repeatedly deleted an item people asked you not to, that is now proven to be notable. the fact that you cannot find a reference does not mean that others cannot. now that it is proven that your notability judgement is proven faulty in this instance, will you refrain from deleting items people ask you not to delete? a week is not an acceptable time frame.
"Umm Assa'd bint Isam al-Himyari" is yet another notable poet you deleted. please undelete it now.
This topic is about the 10 poets that was proposed for deletion. 9 poets are keeped, 1 was delete because there isn't evidence about him/her, this poet is "Janūb Ukht ‘Amr dhī-l-Kalb". In your answer of 17 of september you talk about "Umm Assa'd bint Isam al-Himyari" that is a different person but I don't know who is. If you have an item, I can check, but with only a name I can do nothing.
I think we can close this. It seems that the user isn't actually interested in contributing: Topic:Tz6jywidsxm7vuz5.
LydiaPintscher: In the future, can you attempt to make Help:Sources clear beforehand?
Yes, I read the answer on your talk, and I agree. Thanks
no, you can also undelete the following items which are in your contributions:
- Khadija bint Ahmad ibn Kulthum al-Mu'afiri (Arabic: خديجة بنت أحمد بن كُلثوم المُعافرِيّ, C10–11 CE)
- Ghassaniyya al-Bajjaniyya (Arabic: الغسَّانية البجانية, C11 CE)
- Amat al-Aziz (Arabic: أمة العزيز, C12 CE)
- Hind (Arabic: هند, C12 CE)
- Umm al-Hana bint Abdulhaqq ibn Atiyya (Arabic: أم الهناء بنت عبد الحق بن عطية, C12 CE)
- Ashshilbiyya (Arabic: الشلبية, C12 CE)
- Aa'isha al-Iskandraniyya (Arabic: عائشة اللإسكندرانية)
- Umm Assa'd bint Isam al-Himyari (Arabic: أم السعد بنت عصام الحميري, d. 1243 CE)
Without item (Qnumber) I can't do nothing, already said 6 days ago: "If you have an item, I can check, but with only a name I can do nothing."
your edits are in your contributions. if you cannot fix your mistakes in your contributions, then you harm the project. other people should not be expected to fix your mistakes. if you disrupt another work list across multiple wikipedias, then we will go to AN.
Can we all take it down a notch again and concentrate on moving this project forward in a positive way?
Lydia, I don't think that use of plural is correct.
Mine behavior or behavior of Jura or your or behavior of Ash Crow was wrong?
The topic is started to talk about 10 poets delete by me for notability. We have talked in RfD, and correct reference was added on 9 item, the last did not have correct reference and was deleted. This is happen 2 months ago.
23 days ago, Slowking4 join to discussion here with the accusation of "disrupting efforts to write content". I try to explain the problem of the reference: "the reference for the 10th poet isn't correct because the name don't exist in the book or is wrong". Jura and me suggest them that it might add a proper source. After one week, in the end, we find out he was talking of another poet, not mentioned in RfD, I said that "I can't check without number of the item" but no number has been provided.
At the end, yesterday he write me to undelete other 8 item, but only indicates the name without Qnumber, I ask the number and you can see the answer.
Meantime answer to Jura, like to see in his talk: I report here just to know: "go to hell. i do not edit for assholes." (testual)
Who should lower the tones?
I don't think that the behavior of Slowking4 is correct.
i do not appreciate disrupting editathons where content was created. people you deleted as not notable are now proven to be notable with articles in multiple languages. you do not collaborate, you dictate, with artificial timelines for a deletion sword of Damocles. people ask you not to delete items and you do it multiple times. you do not need a q number to undelete. you sent an ideologue to troll my talk page.
this editor shows no comprehension of how to collaborate. he has an idiosyncratic interpretation of notability. i fully expect this editor to abide by "3. It fulfills some structural need, for example: it is needed to make statements made in other items more useful." either this editor stops his disruptive behavior, or we will be at AN.
and if you allow disruptive deletion of items on work lists, then we will take the work lists off wiki. wikidata will be reactive, not proactive.
as he wanted to demonstrate.
Your statement on Jura's "you sent an ideologue to troll my talk page" is another demonstration of your attitude.
Last thing: I can't restore item if I haven't Qnumeber.