User talk:Kelob2678

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Kelob2678. Thank you for your work on Ferdinand Feldbrugge. Another editor, Mariamnei, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice start! Since this article falls under WP:BLP, please add in-line citations to the few claims that do not already have footnotes. Thanks and have a great day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Mariamnei}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Mariamnei (talk) 09:02, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

@Mariamnei: Which claims are unreferenced? Kelob2678 (talk) 09:17, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Klavdiya Gadyuchkina

Your contribution here, was well researched, essential and, in my opinion, might just help finally bring to an end the far too early and often totally unnecessary creation of these pages. While some supercentenarian pages are obviously needed and are, to a certain degree, interesting, the vast majority are mundane beyond belief and completely unencyclopedic. Sincere regards, MattSucci (talk) 14:57, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

RfC - Airport destination lists

Hi, for your information, as you were involved in the previous discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Airport destination lists or the RfC on consensus of WP:DESTNOT at WT:NOT, I wanted to let you know that the discussed broader RfC has been opened at WP:VPP#RfC - The inclusion of destination lists in Airport articles. If you wish to contribute, please feel free. Many thanks! Danners430 _{tweaks made} 21:08, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Tentative list of List of World Heritage Sites in the Soviet Union

In Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of World Heritage Sites in the Soviet Union, you stated "tentative list. The 1989 list for the SU contained 28 elements, of which 25 were later inscribed". As I want to get this article to WP:Featured list candidates, do you have any sources for the 1989 tentative list of the Soviet Union? If you could provide a link to them, I would be able to expand it enough to meet the length and completeness requirements that the WP:Featured list criteria require. Thank you, User:Easternsahara_{review this} 05:40, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

I took it from page 300 of this book. The relevant quote is, It comprised 28 properties, of which only twelve matched or varied slightly from the properties listed earlier. It cites UNESCO archives as a source, but I wasn't able to access them online. On page 228, there is another list by the Soviet Union, it is complete, but not final. Kelob2678 (talk) 12:01, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Kelob2678!

Happy New Year!

Kelob2678,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
BhikhariInformer (talk) 16:53, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

BhikhariInformer (talk) 16:53, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion thanks

Thanks for catching my mistake on Mohini Mohan Dhar. I'm not sure why I made that mistake but you are correct that since the article was created by the sockpuppet of a banned user, it should be speedy deleted. The article is now gone. SouthernNights (talk) 00:12, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. Kelob2678 (talk) 00:24, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Seeking Guidance on the Review of Zaheer Farooqui's Article Deletion

Hi Kelob2678,

I hope you are doing well. I noticed that you were among the editors who participated in the deletion discussion for the Wikipedia page on Zaheer Farooqui, as listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zaheer Farooqui. I am reaching out to seek your guidance on the appropriate way to request a review of the deletion and explore the possibility of restoring the article.

Since the page was deleted, I have come across additional independent and reliable news coverage that was not included in the earlier version of the article. This includes reporting by established news organisations on Zaheer Farooqui’s work as Chairman of the Purkazi Nagar Panchayat, particularly relating to local governance, education initiatives, and community development. Some of this coverage appears to post-date the earlier AfD discussion and may be relevant to the notability concerns that were raised at the time.

My intention is to ensure that any further steps fully align with Wikipedia’s content policies, including WP and sourcing guidelines. Before taking action, I wanted to seek community input and advice from experienced editors like yourself on the most appropriate process—whether that be a deletion review, draft recreation, or another recommended approach.

If you are willing, I would greatly appreciate any guidance you can offer on how best to proceed. Your insight would be very helpful in ensuring that any future submission is policy-compliant and constructive.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Kind regards

Wikicon07 Wikicon07 (talk) 15:16, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Airport destination lists sourcing RfC

Hi there,

I'm leaving this message because you contributed to the recent RfC regarding the inclusion of airport destination lists. As promised, now that that RfC has closed, I've initiated a further discussion about the sourcing standards to be applied to these lists.

If you wish to contribute to the discussion, please do so at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Airport destination lists - sourcing requirements.

Cheers! Danners430 _{tweaks made} 15:23, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Your Studio and You

Good find on the magazine article. I think that's just about enough to get it over the line now, so I'll let the AFD play out. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 19:01, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Follow up on discussion from AfD

Moving the discussion here out of fear of violating one of WP's guidelines with regard to too many replies by the article creator's subject on an AfD discussion. I do not believe that the coverage is trivial coverage. Nor do I believe that a stub needs to meet the same stringent guidelines as a full fledged article. It is labeled as a stub, it has eight sources, including one each by Rolling Stone and QNews. That is far more sources than are present on most articles on Wikipedia that have been marked as a stub. Additionally, you can't review an unreleased album, and there are several other upcoming albums that are not released yet that have articles on Wikipedia, such as Steel Town. There are more than enough sources to establish the album's notability in this instance. - Evelyn Harthbrooke (leave a message · contributions) 20:32, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Redirect

Hello! Hope you are doing well. Yesterday, you closed an AFD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Mary's Higher Secondary School, Madurai) as redirect to it's own page only (St. Mary's Higher Secondary School, Madurai) instead of the List of Jesuit educational institutions#List of Jesuit secondary schools, that was suggested in the consensus. So, umm.....can you please look into this and see if it is possible to fix the redirect target now? Thanks! BhikhariInformer (talk) 01:31, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, I've reclosed the AfD. Kelob2678 (talk) 01:35, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

^⁠_⁠^ BhikhariInformer (talk) 02:01, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey

Hi. I see you a Iron hand source finder. Can you advice me on this draft Draft:Rajeev Bhattacharyya. I have read his a few books but have not much knowing about him. I created the draft assuming that he passes WP:NAUTHOR having 2 notable books with multiple reviews.

What's your opinion? SatnaamIN (talk) 00:54, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

I think he passes WP:NAUTHOR. Kelob2678 (talk) 09:13, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your opinion. I guess the draft will be accepted and pass NPR. SatnaamIN (talk) 04:18, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

List of cars with non-standard door designs

Which sources in the article support that "non-standard" is a type of car door? That's the main beef with the article, that it doesn't spell out what "non-standard" even is. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 13:26, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

The article defines "non-standard" as any type of door that is not hinged at the front edge of the door, and swings away from the car horizontally and towards the front of the car, the latter door is called standard. There are sources that discuss doors that deviate from the standard. Kelob2678 (talk) 14:29, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

The definition itself still needs to be sourced, though. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 16:00, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

No, it shouldn't. This is an inclusion criterion for a list, which is quite often determined via editorial consensus, a typical example is when a list includes only notable individuals. No one defines "notability" outside of Wikipedia, and yet lists of only notable individuals are perfectly acceptable. Kelob2678 (talk) 16:21, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

To me, it's like saying "list of shopping malls with a Cinnabon on the second level". Sure, you may prove it, but is it worthy of making a list out of? It's WP:SYNTH on its face and I don't know why no one is seeing this and just blindly bleating "keep" without saying why. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 17:14, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

In contrast to a list of shopping malls with a Cinnabon on the second level, cars with unusual doors have been discussed in the sources. If you think this is SYNTH, then many lists are SYNTH and are backed by consensus. When I think about whether something is worthy of making a list out of, one of the criteria is that some good-faith editor actually invested their time in creating such a list, which is a good enough reason to consider it worthy, unless there are some solid P&G reasons that prevent the existence of the list. Kelob2678 (talk) 19:10, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

What criterion of WP:SALAT does it meet? How can something be "non-standard" when we don't have a source corroborating what the "standard" even is? Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 17:22, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

Whether the list is too broad or not is determined by consensus. I don't think it fails this criterion because the number of entries looks reasonable. Regarding your last question, it sounds similar to How can something be "notable" when we don't have a source corroborating what the "notable" even is?, and yet we have many lists limited to only notable entries, because again it is up to editorial judgment. Kelob2678 (talk) 17:30, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

By your logic, I can make "list of malls with a Cinnabon on the second floor" because it passes "editorial judgment", whatever that is. You sound like you're arguing circular logic here. The list is notable because we say it's notable, and because we say it's notable, the list is therefore notable. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:02, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

You obviously can create such a list, but it will be nominated at AfD and editors will decide to delete it. My logic is not circular, the list passes WP:SALAT because its size looks reasonable to me, however, other editors may disagree. Regarding notability in general, there is this comment with which I fully agree. Kelob2678 (talk) 18:08, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

Keep it up!

Hey @Kelob2678! Just wanted to stop by and say your participation at AfD is excellent! I took a look at your match rate and it's pretty much perfect, which is unheard of really! Saw a close from you recently, so just wanted to say, if you feel able to gauge consensus and you believe your knowledge of P&Gs is sound, definitely continue! 11WB (talk) 19:00, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. I don't think you should put much weight into the match rate. It is inflated because I usually vote at AfDs that are closing on a given day, which makes my vote last and very unlikely to lead to a mismatch. It is also inflated by unclosed AfDs. Kelob2678 (talk) 19:12, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

That is true to a certain extent, however having seen many of your !vote comments, I'm confident that your knowledge far surpasses editors that only !vote in a pile-on manner. I've seen opposition to only !voting on the day that an AfD is due to be closed, but with actual rationales being left rather than a simple "per nom", I think it's safe to say your match rate, whilst maybe slightly inflated, is probably close to accurate! 11WB (talk) 19:18, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Filaret Denysenko

On 28 March 2026, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Filaret Denysenko, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Spencer^T•C 21:14, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Help to find sources.

For articles Hacıhəsənli and Dərəcənnət, both are unreferenced. The Prod Edit summary mentions, There are sources in the Azerbaijani Wikipedia. Woudering if you may be able to find and add a reference for these articles? Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 17:54, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

I added populations based on the 2009 census. Kelob2678 (talk) 12:37, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Non Admin Closures

I have mentioned this in AfD discussions but now formally request you not make additional non-admin closures such as this. CNMall41 (talk) 19:32, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Another example. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:33, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Why do you think the closures were inappropriate? Kelob2678 (talk) 19:33, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Besides knowledge of policy per WP:NACEXP and the voting for those discussions being "not clearly unambiguous", closing as merge despite WP:BADNAC (#3) shows you do not have fundamental knowledge of the requirements. Your contention in several recent AfDs also shows what I believe is a misinterpretation of some of notability guidelines around inherent notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:50, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Closing as merge usually doesn't require an immediate merge of histories, at least, I've never seen closing admins doing this. In that debate, the consensus was clear as 2 supported deletion, 2 merge, and 2 keep (but one was not opposed to merge and another based his vote on WP:OSE). No reason to discard AtD was provided. Kelob2678 (talk) 20:58, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

The guidelines do you say that. Let me be clear as I do not want to litigate as you and I have at other AfDs. I am asking you to stop non admin closures until you have experience at interpreting policy. Right now, you haven't even interpreted the NAC guideline correctly. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:02, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

I will not stop. I think my interpretations of policy are reasonable. Kelob2678 (talk) 21:04, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Sounds good. I will file at ANI later this evening once I put it all together. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:06, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

This is an extremely poor decision. I was given the same advice as you, and while mine were much worse, you have serious issues with yours. I would recommend just reopening and moving on, and you can always just relist. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 03:16, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

I just disagree that these closes were inappropriate, more specifically, they have very little chance of being overturned at DRV. Now, I don't mind stopping closes for some time if my non-admin status makes other editors uncomfortable, but I don't want this to be framed as an issue with my competence. Kelob2678 (talk) 05:34, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Well, I don't think they are that bad, but they do have issues. I will warn you, CNMall41 is prepping a case, and he is correct in the letter of the policy about at least the merge close. Have a defense, watch your tone, and for the love of god admit fault if it becomes clear that you are at fault, which, again, you certainly seem to be in the case of the merge close. Good luck!

Kingsmasher678 (talk) 06:09, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

The first of them had no real consensus, let alone on where to redirect to. The second is actually pretty good IMO, but cite policy for why you closed that way. I would consider reopening at least the first one.

Kingsmasher678 (talk) 20:51, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Three editors supported a redirect, all indicating the same target to which I redirected. One supported deletion and one keeping, appealing to sources present in the article. While the keep position was based on the guidelines, it didn't convince three participants afterward.

I don't think non-admin closures should be explained, as the fact of an explanation itself is an indication that the closer believes the debate was contentious, so such closures should be left to admins. That said, I think both were straightforward and therefore didn't require any explanation. Kelob2678 (talk) 21:01, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

See? That's the issue. You are eluding to vote count again which has already been discussed with you. Also, what you think is irrelevant to what the guidelines say. Please stop non-admin closures. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:03, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

"I don't think non-admin closures should be explained", this is case-dependent, but in general, they shouldn't be controversial enough that an explanation is required. Kelob2678 (talk) 21:10, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Burton Richardson

I'm not sold on the first source, as it's routine coverage of an event unrelated to his career and gives zero biographical information. The second source is definitely SIGCOV, and if you find two more like it, I'd be happy. Ten Pound Hammer (they/them) • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 15:22, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

I don't think I will be able to find more. My position also relies on WP:NCREATIVE since he was an announcer (which I assume is a significant role) for multiple shows, and the bulk of his career happened more than two decades ago, so the coverage is hard to find. Kelob2678 (talk) 17:23, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Other game show personnel had their articles deleted despite similar careers, such as Randy West and Dean Goss. And "there must be sources somewhere" isn't a really strong argument. Ten Pound Hammer (they/them) • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 17:29, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes, but they had zero sources, here we have at least something. Kelob2678 (talk) 17:33, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

"My position also relies on WP:NCREATIVE" - CREATIVE still requires significant coverage. It does not confer notability as it says "likely" notable, not "is" notable. This is something that I tried to discuss with you about WP:NMUSIC as well. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:57, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Agreed. I can think of multiple cases where someone met WP:NCREATIVE, WP:NMUSIC, or some other specific notability guideline, yet still failed WP:GNG, and their article was deleted for lack of sourcing. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Berman (4th nomination), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Spano, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Pierce (songwriter), to name a few. Ten Pound Hammer (they/them) • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:23, 22 April 2026 (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 how to format Volodymyr Zelenskyy's place of birth in the infobox. 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. The thread is "Volodymyr Zelenskyy".

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Thedarkknightli (talk) 17:15, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Hope you are OK

It's been a while since you've edited, I hope you are doing OK. I always appreciate your contributions to AfD. Katzrockso (talk) 16:16, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, I am fine. Kelob2678 (talk) 17:48, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Very glad to see you are back! Katzrockso (talk) 02:37, 1 September 2026 (UTC)