This is Shadow311's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 90 days

Hi, I was just wondering how you concluded the consensus was KEEP when most arguments were not strong, many clearly in breach WP:RGW and WP:ADVOCACY, and some from accounts created solely to comment. Thanks! WikiMane (TP2001) ( talk) 17:23, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply

@ ThunderPeel2001 From what it looked like, no one was supporting the deletion of the article. Some of the people that were against the deletion had 50k, 18k, and 20k edits. Shadow311 ( talk) 18:47, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Shadow311 Hey, sorry. Just getting back into some Wikipedia editing. This just popped into my head again. I'm still confused by your decision, because (according to the documentation) it's not the number of votes, it's the reasons given that count. And the reasons were nearly all against WP guidelines. When the poor reasons were removed, the arguments between delete/keep seemed even? Although I've been involved in many pages, this was the first time I've gone through the AfD process and I found it completely confusing as nobody seemed to follow the guidelines? Just so I can understand, which arguments did you feel had merit? Thanks! (Still learning!) WikiMane (TP2001) ( talk) 22:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on User:Tonywalker2050/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Qcne (talk) 13:04, 30 April 2024 (UTC) reply

meanie

104.244.246.89 ( talk) 15:39, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Your edit was vandalism. Shadow311 ( talk) 15:40, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply

no 104.244.246.89 ( talk) 15:45, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply

You just put a random number. Shadow311 ( talk) 15:46, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply

if i did it was an accident sry 104.244.246.89 ( talk) 15:47, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply

it was not 104.244.246.89 ( talk) 15:46, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Could you perhaps explain which part of the draft was written non-neutrally? S5A-0043 ^Talk 15:36, 9 May 2024 (UTC) reply

It repeatedly refers to the subject as popular and refers to it in a overly positive way. Shadow311 ( talk) 15:40, 9 May 2024 (UTC) reply

I have to disagree. “popular” and “viral” are among the most common words used to describe the subject by the sources themselves, including English ones. Plus, there was a “reception” section highlighting some of the criticism against the subject, so I fail to see how it was described “in an overly positive way”. Admittedly I re-read the article and found 1-2 parts where I would not have written in the manner I did a few months ago, but I still don’t find them too major for a fail. S5A-0043 ^Talk 15:53, 9 May 2024 (UTC) reply

If you want to, you can resubmit it and I will let someone else review it. Shadow311 ( talk) 15:55, 9 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi, I noticed you recently reverted this IP user's edits to their own talk page and warned them for vandalism on their own talk page. It's important to note that most users are permitted to edit their talk page as they please, so long as they remain civil. Is there something I missed, or was this a minor mistake? Thanks, Neuropol ^Talk 15:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Ive changed the warning and put a notice instead. Shadow311 ( talk) 15:07, 10 May 2024 (UTC) reply

How come it was denied? I thought the references i put were enough, ive seen pages with 0 references get accepted + i gave quotes to thr parts of the source i referenced (not to mention the japanese version of the page had 4 references unlike my 11) BeamLSB ( talk) 09:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Pages without any references should not be accepted and most likely were not processed by an AfC reviewer. Please see the Verifiability policy. Just using quotes, is not providing an actual source. Shadow311 ( talk) 13:08, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello Shadow311,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Ethnic Faces for deletion, because it's a redirect from an article title to a namespace that's not for articles.

If you don't want Ethnic Faces to be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

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

– Hilst [talk] 14:11, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi, What are you doing moving this article into mainspace when its an identical recreation of article that has been deleted at csd, afd and proded about eight times and salted. Are you not checking the articles your promoting. This is clear paid for UPE article and its unacceptable to move such trash into mainspace. scope_creep ^Talk 19:19, 27 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Greetings, Shadow311. Firstly, that you for being a regular contributor to Wikipedia. I very much appreciate people like you who have the time and the skills to do what you do.

I am a very occasional contributor, and tend to browse anonomously. However, I've just noticed a message from you as follows:

Hello, I'm Shadow311. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Jack Williams have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Shadow311 (talk) 19:45, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Looking at the Jack Williams history page, I see it was an IP edit (83.219.49.130). The history for that IP is definitely not me! However, I also noticed that there was an Antivandal tag. If that's what it sounds like, it might imply I was defacing or misbehaving. I hope there is nothing marked on my account for this.

Anyway, thank you again for being an active contributor.

Beechside Beechside ( talk) 16:00, 21 June 2024 (UTC) reply