User talk:Bastun

Speedy deletion nomination of 2024 Masters (darts)

Hello Bastun,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged 2024 Masters (darts) for deletion, because it's a redirect from an article title to a namespace that's not for articles.

If you don't want 2024 Masters (darts) 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.

~ Tails Wx 19:01, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Leek RUFC

I see that you have requested the immediate deletion of my article about Leek RUFC.

It was widely established, and accepted, many years ago that any English rugby union club which plays, or has played, at level 5 or above is notable enough to have its own article. Leek is now playing at that level and this is why I created the article. Therefore I am not sure as to why you have asked for this article to be speedily deleted. Rillington (talk) 01:53, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Rillington, I replied at Talk:Leek RUFC. Cheers, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:17, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

I have replied. I hope you will accept that my reply is respectful and sticks to facts, and that it does not revert to displays of emotion/upset which, you will understand, does exist following this speedy deletion request.

I also want to respectfully make two observations which I feel are better suited to your talk page. Wouldn't it have been much more positive to have spend a short period of time improving the article rather than engaging in this speedy deletion request. If you had done this then the already several hours of my time which I have spent trying to counteract your speedy deletion request would have been spent more productively elsewhere on Wikipedia. Also, with hindsite, might it have been better to have left a note outlining your concerns on my talkpage rather than going for a speedy deletion? Rillington (talk) 02:23, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Rillington. We help the project where we can and where we have interest. So I edit articles of interest to me, and in my own case, I decided to help out doing some 'backroom' stuff. So, for context, I joined the Wikipedia:New pages patrol in the last couple of weeks. Checking WP's newly created pages involves following a somewhat convoluted procedure. After checking Leek RUFC against the standard 'General Notability Guidelines' (as teams don't have a specific notability one) I followed up by checking the specific guidelines for Rugby Union teams. As mentioned, Leek RUFC doesn't seem to meet those guidelines either, but if, as you say, there are already dozens of such articles, the logical thing to do would be to get that notability guideline changed on the Rugby Union project, as, as it stands, the article still doesn't appear to meet the GNG guidelines: A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

Likewise, no disrespect intended, but if you've spent several hours on the article since I tagged it, I'd expect it to be longer than two sentences and have some independent sources added. While I'm not going to nominate the article for deletion, it's quite possible somebody else will, and as it stands, it would not survive AfD. And no, I'm not a deletionist - the logs show I've tagged/patrolled 121 articles since 1st Jan, and nominated only 5 for deletion. One of those was in a foreign language, and one was about a family farm with no claim to notability or sources. Cheers, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:44, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your replies, and I am glad that you haven't taken any offence to my postings. Despite our disagreement, we remained respectful and civil and we should both be proud of this. Almost all of us have the same basic goal and that is to improve Wikipedia, and I know you share this goal with me.

Even before you made your point about only nominating 5/121 patrolled articles for deletion, I had already concluded that you are not a deletionist, and only hinted at this because you used such a draconian tool on this occasion. Rillington (talk) 06:04, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

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!

Jonathan f1 (talk) 03:28, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

What The Banner said. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:00, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your patience

I just wanted to say thank you for your patience and your contributions to Black Irish (folklore). As a subject, it's proving to be one of the most contentious I've ever had to engage in on Wikipedia, and I appreciate having someone knowledgable "in the room" for the conversations on the Talk page. I don't know about the immediate future, but maybe a year from now, I could envision the article becoming semi-protected or some other kind of lock if it continues to attract a certain kind of user who is overtly interested in pseudo-history/pseudo-science.

I appreciate your efforts, CeltBrowne (talk) 18:52, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome! I can't believe this... I hesitate to call it a "debate" has been ongoing for over a year now! :-) Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 20:52, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Pfft

Hi Bastun. I don't follow rugby so I know very little about it. I didn't know the sport doesn't have "friendlies", so-called.

I see at the friendly match article that rugby friendlies (as I call them, in my ignorance) are never called exhibitions or friendlies "as they always have Test match status", according to the article. I have heard of test matches in cricket but without knowing what that means, because I don't follow cricket either.

Concerning rugby, the article continues, "National teams sometimes play exhibition matches" and "preseason matches". What wasn't clear to me was what these games are called in rugby, if not friendlies, so perhaps that article could use a lick of clarification from an eggball expert like you to rehabilitate an ingenue like me.

I see you opted for "Autumn Nations Series" – I can only bow to your greater wisdom.

My knowledge of sport extends from football to throwing boomerangs and frisbees, so I'm vulnerable to the odd eyerolling "pfft" when I stray beyond my competence :) Thanks for the edit fix. Spideog (talk) 13:16, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Spideog, my tongue was firmly in my cheek when I wrote that edit summary, and I really hope that managed to come across! I am no rugby expert, just a fan, and about 50% of the time I have no clue why a penalty has been called at the breakdown! But essentially, yes, all international games, except warm-up matches on a tour (against, say, a club or provincial side, like when Munster beat the All Blacks, or against a "scratch" team like the Barbarians) count as "test matches" for world ranking points. Which decides things like seedings and pools for the Rugby World Cup. I'll have a look at the article you mention later. In the meantime - happy first day of Sixmas! Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 13:29, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

No offence taken! I saw your smileys and recognised my ignorance. Sixmas, huh? I thought it was The Day After Brigid's Day but, like rugby, I don't follow Christianity either, although I know the Old Testament contains six references to "pissing" which I was told was rude ;) Spideog (talk) 13:46, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of NEXT GIRLZ

Hello Bastun,

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

If you don't want NEXT GIRLZ 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.

CoconutOctopus talk 15:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Mailbutler page deletion

Hi Bastun, can you tell me what is the promotional part that you saw on Mailbutler's page? Can you check Mailbird Wikipedia page to compare it? Thanks Sekulov (talk) 16:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi Sekulov, the whole page was essentially unambigious advertising or promotion. Articles on WP must be about notable topics, that meet the General Notability Guideline, i.e., "A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." - but please read the page for a better understanding. Prior to deletion, the article essentially listed a bunch of features, and plugins that the app works with, i.e., promotional/advertising with no indication of notability or significance. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:22, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Undraftifying Draft:Incomplete_database

Hello, I see you had draftified Draft:Incomplete_database which I had moved to mainspace. Following your feedback I have gone over the article to make it clearer. I think this article is now is a good enough space for main space. If you agree, could you move it back and recreate the redirects that you had deleted? Thanks! a3nm (talk) 14:14, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi A3nm, for a draftified article, you will need to submit the page for review, per WP:AFCREVIEW. Regards, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:41, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I'm confused because I see the following in WP:DRAFTOBJECT: "If an editor raises an objection, move the page back to mainspace and, if necessary, list it at AfD." So I was thinking that, given my objection, you would undo the draftification and move back the article to mainspace. Could you do so? Thanks. a3nm (talk) 15:49, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I assumed that was a request, not an objection. That's done now. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! a3nm (talk) 08:25, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

January 2024 NPP backlog drive – Points award

		Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		This award is given in recognition to Bastun for collecting more than 200 points during the January 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions played a part in the 16,070 reviews completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 22:33, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

January 2024 NPP backlog drive – Streak award

		Geneva mechanism Award
		This award is given in recognition to Bastun for collecting at least 25 points during each week of the January 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions played a part in the 16,070 reviews completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 23:02, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Aww! Thank you, Gerda, very much appreciated! <3 Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 13:21, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Your CSD nomination of Spice rack

Hi Bastun,

Just letting you know I removed your CSD tag on Spice rack. You had tagged it under G4, but the article previously deleted was a redirect to "spice" at the same title, not the article that is currently present. CoconutOctopus talk 11:41, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Oh! Thanks, CoconutOctopus, obviously my coffee hasn't kicked in yet! Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:48, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

No problem! Easy enough mistake to make and no harm done! CoconutOctopus talk 11:50, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Cathal Ó Searcaigh again

Hi again Bastun,

I wasn't aware that I shouldn't link to drafts -- being very inexperienced, I was simply responding to the advice pages advice that drafts should not be left as 'orphans' by having no links to them from other related articles. I've completely misunderstood in that case. You have an eagle eye! Dmhball~enwiki (talk) 13:38, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

No worries, Dmhball~enwiki, the bio page is on my watchlist. Just to note, the bibliography article should be referring to Cathal as Ó Searcaigh, not by forename, in common with the rest of WP. Although references aren't strictly needed for a bibliography, ISBNs. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 13:56, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Global World Series

Hello Bastun, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Global World Series, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: G4: not remotely similar to deleted article, and deletion discussion was nearly 10 years ago. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:21, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi Ivanvector. As I'm not an admin, I don't have visibility of deleted pages, but I can see the prior deletion discussion. What applied in that AfD seemed equally relevant to the current article. In fact, Spanneraol, who nominated the prior article for deletion, has also sent the re-created one to AfD. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 22:05, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Ivanvector How can you say the new article is not "remotely similar to the deleted article"? It's about the exact same subject and the content is substantially the same. Spanneraol (talk) 22:31, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Draft:The book of numbers that appear in the sacred scriptures

Hello, Bastun,

You draftified this article but didn't inform the article creator about this page move as you are supposed to have done. Either post a message yourself on their User Talk page letting them know where they can find their article or use a script like User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft that does it automatically for you. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:30, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Liz, Will do.Still learning! Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 10:27, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Undraftifying Draft:Uncertain_database

Hi,

In January, you had draftified Draft:Uncertain database. I have just gone over the draft to improve it, and I'd like to object (gently) -- I think it is ready to move back to mainspace now. Would that be possible? Thanks! a3nm (talk) 16:31, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi, A3nm - that's done. Regards, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 17:14, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! --a3nm (talk) 10:51, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Predecessor (video game)

You didn't remove any of the CV text. That needs to be done before an admin can perform the RD. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:53, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Apologies, UtherSRG, I'll do that now. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 13:06, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

My bad, UtherSRG, the copyvio had already been removed following an AfC decline by Pythoncoder. I've updated the revdel template now to have correct diff. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 13:18, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! RD competed. :) - UtherSRG (talk) 13:44, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Cheerleader (Porter Robinson song)

You draftified Cheerleader (Porter Robinson song) to draft without giving explicit reason for it. While checking th draft, there are reasonable number of sources for standalone or maybe short which can be expanded. All the Best! Otuọcha (talk) 11:13, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Otuọcha, I used the 'Move to draft' script, which leaves the reason in the edit summary (unless it's a custom reason, which this was), and which also fills in the full reason on the draftified page. Per WP:NSONG, trivial repeats of a press release announcing a new song do not count as significant coverage. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:17, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

That can be a case of TOOSOON. Well, under WP:NCOVER, Songs that do not rise to notability for an independent article should redirect to another relevant article, such as for the songwriter, a prominent album or for the artist who prominently performed the song. It's best it's redirected to the singer. I suggest you do that or I do. (Passionate appeal) All the Best! Otuọcha (talk) 11:21, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Just an FYI, you aren't supposed to draftify articles more than once, as using draftspace is optional. Elli (talk | contribs) 18:40, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

No one was talking about draftifying twice. OP in some way. All the Best! Otuọcha (talk) 19:02, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

@Otuọcha: I was talking to Bastun, who draftified the page twice. There was no point in making a separate talkpage section. Sorry for the confusion. Elli (talk | contribs) 22:45, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Owh! Alright. Just to clear claims. All the Best! Otuọcha (talk) 22:47, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Edelman Family Foundation

Hello @Bastun

I am reaching out to you because of your previous participation in one of the discussions regarding the reliability and neutrality of HuffPost/Pink News/ProPublica as sources used on Wikipedia.

Currently, there is an ongoing issue with the Edelman Family Foundation section in the Joseph Edelman Wikipedia article. The section appears to be biased and lacks a balanced representation of the foundation's activities, as it primarily focuses on a single controversial donation while neglecting to mention the organization's numerous other significant contributions to various causes.

I would like to invite you to participate in the discussion on the BLP Noticeboard to address the concerns surrounding the section's neutrality and explore ways to improve its content. Llama Tierna (talk) 18:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024

Hello Bastun,

New Page Review queue January to March 2024

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

New page patrol May 2024 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2023 Dublin riot, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Slovakian.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:17, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

May 2024

Your recent editing history at Killone Abbey shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Kindly stop hijacking the page and adding non-encyclopedic statements Kellycrak88 (talk) 11:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Please read WP:BRD and stop trying to WP:OWN the article, Kelly. A restoration of referenced content and engagement on the article talk page is exactly what I am supposed to do. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:06, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Unbelievable that you're continuing to EDIT WAR on related pages!

Your recent editing history at Killone shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Please stop your biased agenda. Further to consensus on Talk page of Killone Abbey page, non-encyclopaedic contentious statement (private) right of way was removed by other neutral editor @Asilvering, as without context or full explanation confuses readers and is unnecessary for an encyclopaedic article hence the confusion in the first place with someone calling it a public right of way and Talk page discussion. Users can read more about Guardianship of OPW on Killone Abbey page. This page is for Killone civil parish, it is not Killone Abbey page. For anyone reading this see Killone Abbey Talk page for what @Bastun is doing. Kellycrak88 (talk) 20:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

@Kellycrak88, please don't template editors who obviously know what they're doing, and please don't call other editors biased when there is no evidence that they are not acting in good faith. It is ridiculous that you are being accused of trying to WP:OWN articles you did not create or substantially contribute to, but it's no less antagonistic to repeatedly hit another editor with warning templates about edit warring. I have suggested a way forward on my talk page in response to Bastun's comment there. The two of you can take it or leave it - it's only a suggestion and there are other ways to work through this - but continuing the argument via warning templates is not a good solution. -- asilvering (talk) 21:57, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Lowland Scot and English Protestant Settlers did not Speak Irish Gaelic

The Lowland Scot/Ulster Scot and Anglo-Irish communities in Ireland spoke Scots or English, not Irish, and still do. Their ancestors brought these languages to Ireland, and did not speak Irish Gaelic. A tiny minority of Ulster Scots from Galloway in SW Scotland spoke Galwegian Gaelic, which is Scots Gaelic, NOT Irish Gaelic. 65.95.157.102 (talk) 15:41, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Read the message at the top of the page, please. This is not the place. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:43, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

I started a discussion on the talk page, and the organization you linked to never claims that Irish Gaelic was historically ever a community, native or ethnic language of Protestant Scots and English settlers or descendant communities in Ireland (it wasn't). Protestantism's arrival in Ireland began the intense Anglicization of the country, and the settlement sought to sever Gaelic, Catholic Ulster from the Gaelic, Catholic Scottish Highlands.

Also, the website you linked to confuses Scots Gaelic or Galwegian Gaelic with Ulster Irish Gaelic. They are different languages. Ulster Protestants and Ulster Scots were never native IRISH Gaelic speakers. 65.95.157.102 (talk) 15:54, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

National Party

Please do not remove information in regards to their local elections, the electoral commission has allowed the Reynolds faction to run in the elections and it is important to highlight their policies post Barrett. Tim121212 (talk) 15:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't believe I did remove anything like that? And no, we will not list their "11 principles" or whatever number it is now; we don't outline other parties' principles like that, they don't get to be an exception. Are you a member? You may need to declare a WP:COI if so. Lastly, see the notice at the top of my page? This isn't the place to discuss article content, that's for the article's Talk page. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:16, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Van Snyder (DJ)

Hi,

Being Austria's most popular celebrity 2023 was not just an article on one single website. First of all the information is based on facts by a study/survey. After that the results of the study that has been made, has been published in the crown newspapers of Austria, Germany and Switzerland like "Kronen Zeitung (krone.at)", "Der Kurier (kurier.at)" "gala.de", Abendzeitung München, Schweizer Illustrierte and more. --Base-X (talk) 16:08, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

May 2024 NPP backlog drive – Points award

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	This award is given in recognition to Bastun for accumulating at least 10 points during the May 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions helped play a part in the 14,452 reviews completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 18:49, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thanks for your work on NPP! Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 19:25, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Notability

Wikipedia states that by Featuring with a notable musician makes you eligible for a wikipedia page right? Kemaricon (talk) 12:27, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Kemaricon. No, not that I'm aware of. There are general notability guidelines - WP:GNG - that state "A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." and there are specific requirements for musicians, listed at WP:MUSICBIO. The artist known as 'Starlord' does not appear to have met any of the 12 criteria listed there. Note it's not enough to have just met one of the criteria - there still also needs to be significant coverage by multiple independent reliable sources.

If you want to create an article on this musician, I would strongly suggest creating it in WP:DRAFTSPACE rather than main article-space, or using the 'Articles for Creation' process, which means the article will be reviewed and you'll get feedback on it (though be aware, there is a backlog). Re-creating the same one- or two-sentence article with just a single reference and no claim to notability will just result in the article being deleted again, for the fourth time. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:04, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Article deletion

Hello,

I see you marked my article on the mickey joe trophy for deletion as it has now been actioned as the article is gone.

Would it be possible to confirm that all information is now fully and permanently deleted and that no record of the page exists in any ack up or other location that I cannot view in my account?

Regards

Eoin James Eoin James (talk) 13:46, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

About your reverts

Hi, @Bastun.

I don't want to make you uncomfortable or cause problems, but I would like to express some disagreement with your reversions. You said in the edit summary that the updates are not referenced. I understand that in the case of the added note. However, I find your words a bit incongruous because the above data itself are not literally mentioned in the references put on the list; In addition, in order to meet that criterion that you mentioned, it would be urgent to eliminate the article because, If we literally base ourselves on sources, it is impossible both to make a list of 30 channels and to keep it updated. Thanks for reading. Santi (talk) 04:56, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

WP:V is literally one of the five pillars that the encyclopedia is built on. Where did you get your figures from? That's your source. If it's a reliable source, then put it in the article. If there is no reliable source, it shouldn't go in. You're right, though, the article should really be deleted, and I should have nominated it for deletion when I first reviewed it, or, at least, when it became clear that the main author wasn't going to bother adding references. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 18:17, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Academic notability

Sorry, but I think you are being a bit too critical of certain academics. Franco Nori is an automatic pass as an APS Fellow, and Goki Eda is a clear pass based upon his citations as several others have already said, as is Aron Walsh. (I am making no comment about content/AI and I did note the issues with the original editor. However, that does not make them unnotable.) Ldm1954 (talk) 10:01, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Re:Regarding the Sahay family page

Hello, Bastun. You have new messages at Localproblem7110's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Localproblem7110 (talk) 16:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

New pages patrol September 2024 Backlog drive

New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Symbiosexuality

Hi Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!.Thanks for reviewing this article.The subject is a matter of intensive search in Google and has a sufficient coverage in secondary sources. Request you to move the article to mainspace. Will improve the article in the mainspace and others too will join.Thank you in advance. Gardenkur (talk) 05:43, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Gardenkur. No, I moved the article to draft space because it does not meet the standard expected of articles in main article space. My move explanation edit summary outlined why, but in more detail, there are problems with:

• basic copyediting, punctuation, and grammar - e.g., no spaces between words, spaces between full stops and references, 'Camel Case' for a section heading instead of 'Sentence case', punctuation incorrectly inside quotation marks, incorrect punctuation, missing indefinite and definite articles, etc.
• poor referencing - there are absolutely good quality references out there, but what's been included are low-quality mass media/tabloid primer articles. Try to find proper academic sources; or, at least more in-depth articles.
• language - a lot of what's been written is either unclear and needs expansion, or just doesn't make sense. E.g. - I had to read the lead sentence several times to get the meaning of what you were trying to say. And even then, I don't see - from what's been written - how this is any different from polyamory. Another example, "Symbiosexual person are found to be treated poorly" (under a heading of 'Limitation' - what does that mean?!) I think what you were trying to say was "Symbiosexual people may be subject to discrimination," but even if that's the case, there needs to be expansion, you can't just leave a bald statement there without expansion. Who found this? How are they treated poorly? Is it all symbiosexual people, or just some? Is it universal, or only in certain places? Etc.

In short, there are too many problems with the article right now to move it to draft space. The main issue is the language. If that improves enough, a move to main article space can be considered, and one day it may even reach featured article space, but right now, draft space is the proper location. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 09:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Bastun. Thanks a lot for your detailed reply and Iam working on the above to make it prepared for the mainspace.Gardenkur (talk) 15:04, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Far-right or wrong?

Hi Bastun, apologies for involving you in a wee spat between a Southern Republican and a Northern Nationalist! What's your take on describing Waters as "far-right". To me he doesn't qualify - it's a bit like the term "fascism" - everyone seems to be accusing everyone else of it. To the point that it's lost its meaning. Sarah777 (talk) 20:09, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh, he's absolutely gone down the far-right rabbit hole. He started off as just your average columnist - a little bit quirky, maybe, but that was all. But have you seen the stuff he's been up to lately? Espousing the "Great Replacement", hanging out with the National Party, supporting Gemma O'Doherty - and he's involved in her 'Irish Light' rebadged UK far-right "newspaper" (which I see is actually absent from his article). Not at all what you'd expect from the director of Hairspray! ;-) Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 19:38, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Bastun. I will bow to your judgement on this! Have not been a follower of Waters' political evolution but I thought this was just name-calling as when I used to read him in the IT he was just a bit cranky! Sarah777 (talk) 23:32, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Love Sitara

Hi

I saw your moved Love Sitara to draft from mainspace. I have reworked the page and now made it look better. Do have a look an review it again for possible revert to mainspace.

Regards Filmy World (talk) 14:30, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Why? See WP:NFF: Additionally, films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines. Is there something especially notable about this film, that it should have an article before release, or any other indicators of notablity? Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:59, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Draftifying a page multiple times

Please do not do so, as you did at Love, Sitara. It's disruptive and can be considered move warring. See WP:DRAFTOBJECT and send the page to AfD if you still do not believe it belongs in main space. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:36, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

So noted. Still learning. Thanks :-) Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:17, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Business Post articles

Hiya Bastun,

Regarding this edit, most Business Post articles are behind a paywall and will only show you the headline and byline.

There are some unscrupulous characters out there who would advise you to use archive.is to bypass said paywalls, but it would of course be highly immoral to deny the Business Post their €20 per month subscription.

Regards, Boardwalk.Koi (talk) 18:22, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Hey. I use a cookie blocker, which sometimes blocks popups, too, so that must be what happened in this instance - load headline, load popup/paywall/cookie thing, load rest of article, and I got blocked at stage 2 and only saw the headline. Using archive.is to bypass that paywall would be as dubious as disabling javascript for www.irishtimes.com... ;-) Cheers, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 21:22, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Hey about the Ioan Joldea article...

I translated it from romanian to english, since there wasn't really an english source AustroHungarian568 (talk) 09:32, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrator Elections: Candidate instructions

Administrator Elections | Instructions for candidates

Thank you for choosing to run in the October 2024 administrator elections. This bulletin contains some important information about the next stages of the election process.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• October 15–21: SecurePoll setup phase
• October 22–24: Discussion phase
• October 25–31: SecurePoll voting phase
• November 1–?: Scrutineering phase

We are currently in the SecurePoll setup phase. Your candidate subpage will remain closed to questions and discussion. However, this is an excellent opportunity for you to recruit nominators (if you want them) and have them place their nomination statements, and a good time for you to answer the standard three questions, if you have not done so already. We recommend you spend the SecurePoll setup phase from October 15–21 getting your candidate page polished and ready for the next phase.

The discussion phase will take place from October 22–24. Your candidate subpage will open to the public and they will be permitted to discuss you and ask you formal questions, in the same style as a request for adminship (RfA). Please make sure you are around on those dates to answer the formal questions in a timely manner.

On October 25, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. Anyone can see who has voted, but not who they voted for. You are permitted and encouraged to vote in the election, including voting for yourself. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see your tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RfA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, you must have received at least 70% support, calculated as support ÷ (support + oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("'crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation as a candidate, and best of luck.

You're receiving this message because you are a candidate in the October 2024 administrator elections.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Our Admin Election Test

Hello there. As we're preparing to move from one stage to the next, this is just a quick note from one member of the test group to another, wishing you well in the process of this new alternative to RfA. It seems that there are more of us in this group than some in the community anticipated, so i hope that doesn't make the experience any the worse for all of us. Whatever our individual results, i thank you, along with the rest, for stepping up and testing this process; happy days, ~ Lindsay^Hello 07:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi, LindsayH, thanks for your kind words, and best of luck with the process! Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:03, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrator Elections: Discussion phase

Administrator Elections | Discussion phase

The discussion phase of the October 2024 administrator elections is officially open. As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• October 22–24 - Discussion phase
• October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
• November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

During October 22–24, we will be in the discussion phase. The candidate subpages will open to questions and comments from everyone, in the same style as a request for adminship. You may discuss the candidates at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Discussion phase.

On October 25, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi, UOzurumba (WMF) and BGerdemann (WMF) - done!  Done Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 10:29, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

adding maintenance tags while patrolling

Hi there, snooping through your edit summaries for obvious reasons (ahem), I noticed this edit, which added 6 maint tags: [1]. Too much! Ok, maybe you knew it was too much (since you then went for a speedy), but try to keep it just to the very most important things. Personally I think two is ok and three is really pushing it. We want to draw the attention of experienced editors and give less-experienced ones some guidance, not to frustrate people or scare them off. Thanks for handing out encouraging reviewer comments, by the way. -- asilvering (talk) 03:16, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Asilvering, good advice. Still learning! Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 10:29, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrator Elections: Voting phase

Administrator Elections | Voting phase

The voting phase of the October 2024 administrator elections has started and continues until 23:59 31st October 2024 UTC. You can participate in the voting phase at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Voting phase.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
• November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

In the voting phase, the candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies for a vote will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

If at first you don't succeed...

Sorry to see you didn't make it in. I don't think you should have got downvotes for being annoyed by racists years ago. You and I may have been the only Irish candidates in it and certainly the only veterans of the Troubles/IECOLL stuff. I've seen you around on several articles and you always seemed to have clue and I was happy to vote for you, so hopefully next time will be better. Valenciano (talk) 11:53, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Likewise, and sorry to see you lose out by such a narrow margin! Not happy with the large cohort who just seemed to 'oppose all', and no idea why, but overall I think it was a worthwhile experiment, and just needs some tweaking. Cheers, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:50, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I didn't even realise you were involved - I'd have voted for you had I know! Better luck next time - give me a heads-up - I tend to ignore the official spam from Wiki as I'm not in the game - obviously. Sarah777 (talk) 18:50, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Yeah, similarly. Sorry you didn't make it this time - Alison ^talk 03:21, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, Sarah777 and Alison, much appreciated! Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 22:44, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Administrator Candidate Award

		The Contender Barnstar
		This award is given in recognition to Bastun's Contention. We need more like him and less of the others. User:Sarah777

Apologies in advance

Sorry if my recent comment crossed the line into WP:NOTFORUM territory, or indeed opening the can of worms that people are desperately trying to keep closed. Rankersbo (talk) 13:07, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Not at all, I don't think it did, and you made good points. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:46, 13 November 2024 (UTC)