User talk:Toadspike

This is Toadspike's talk page, where you can send him 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: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 10 days

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 1 section is present.

Hello, Toadspike,

In a current discussion on ANI today, you state that "all the uninvolved admins are too scared to follow policy" and "At this point we, the community, just have to admit that no uninvolved admin has the guts to block this longtime editor for personal attacks."

Given your low opinion of our current admin crew, I'd like to encourage you to launch an RfA or participate in the next cycle of administrator elections. I'm sure you are not "too scared" to do so and that you have "the guts" to go for administrator status. Then you can make a change in our administrator corps through your personal bravery which we could use more of. I sincerely hope you consider taking the next step and seek becoming an admin. Go for it! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:03, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You should probably put Wikipedia:Administrator elections/2025 on your Watchlist as the specifics of the next election get settled upon. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:07, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Liz, I appreciate the vote of confidence. I'm putting it off till September for personal reasons (despite my recent burst of activity here, I have to focus on Real Life™ for two months and will then be traveling for a month).

I've already got that page watchlisted, even though I'm not planning to run myself, because I am one of the many people trying to move the AELECT process forward (e.g. here). I'm hoping we get as many qualified candidates this time as we did last time. Toadspike [Talk] 10:34, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Toadspike, the Developing Countries WikiContest will be returning for a second year, and sign-ups are now open! The contest will run from 1 July to 30 September, and the objective remains the same: improve as many articles relating to developing countries as you can to help fight systemic bias on Wikipedia.

In other news, we have a new face on the coordinator team this year: last year's sixth-place finisher, Arconning (talk · contribs)! The coordinators would like to extend a sincere thanks to Ixtal (talk · contribs), who is leaving the team, without whom the contest would not exist. After feedback from contestants last year, the scoring rules are undergoing some modifications; the new rules and a summary of the changes made will be posted to the contest talk page shortly.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or contact one of the coordinators: Arconning (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 09:33, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Toadspike,

I see you are overall an expert on Chinese related topics.

Currently, there is a discussion on Talk:SWAT#Sources and changes where another editor has tried to claim multiple Chinese sources(including, funnily enough, websites of local public security bureaus) are unreliable. May I ask if you could maybe help clear things up for the user, as he seems to be a new editor and not familiar with policies(while doing borderline Wikilawyering). Thehistorianisaac (talk) 11:49, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please be careful to avoid canvassing. Parts of this message, such as "borderline Wikilawyering", are not neutral and you seem to be pinging me because of my previous views on these sources, which could be seen as vote-stacking. I may take a look later, but I am somewhat busy this week, so I can't be certain I will comment on this rather lengthy discussion. Toadspike [Talk] 14:46, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oops sorry, will use a more neutral tone to avoid canvassing; I don't really seek to vote stack, but the user apparently doesn't want to listen to me, and I think you are more a expert in this area. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 14:49, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Toadspike,

Could you close the Randy Cooper article? I think that keeping it open for over 3 weeks is an unnecessary embarrassment for the subject. Also, my experience with AFD's is that hardcore deletionists are the personalities most attracted to old AFD's. Thank you. I appreciate your help. Orlando Davis (talk) 22:10, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Orlando Davis Asking one person in particular to close a discussion, especially in a message referring to "hardcore deletionists", can be considered an inappropriate form of canvassing. I am sure that this will be closed soon, but if you are really worried, the appropriate places to ask for a close are WT:AFD and WP:CR. In any case, I am fairly busy and confined to a mobile device today, so I am unlikely to do any closing of discussions in the next ten hours or so. Toadspike [Talk] 06:50, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If an article has been open too long, it's perfectly within Wiki policy to ask and administrator to close it. Wikipedia frowns on embarrassing subjects. It's not canvassing, it's just me venting about a flaw in Wikipedia. Troll types are more attracted to forums. There have been studies on the matter. I could canvass if I really wanted to. I don't. I understand your point of view. Thank you for your patience. Orlando Davis (talk) 12:39, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I want to publish my page --AshrafSalamin (talk) 01:17, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AshrafSalamin The content currently at User:AshrafSalamin is unsuitable for the encyclopedia as it is promotional and cites no sources. Please see WP:42 for a brief explanation of our notability requirements. It is also very difficult to write an article about yourself, as our articles must be written from a neutral point of view; WP:AUTO explains this issue and others. Toadspike [Talk] 05:51, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for participating in the Articles for Creation June Backlog Drive! We've done amazing work so far, dropping the backlog by more than 2000 drafts already. We have around 300 drafts outstanding, and we need your help to get that down to zero in 5 days. We can do this, but we need all hands on deck to make this happen. A list of the pending drafts can be found at WP:AFCSORT, where you can select submissions in your area of interest. Thank you so much for your work so far, and happy reviewing! – DreamRimmer ■ 01:35, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Toadspike,

I hope you are doing well. While I was preparing to ask WikiMentor01 about the recent decline of my article Draft:Ronkay_Arslan – I noticed your note on the page and saw that you have considerable experience reviewing drafts. I thought it best to come straight to you for advice.

Over the past few weeks I have:

•Replaced all primary or self-published references with independent national and international coverage of Ronkay Arslan.

•Added inline citations for every factual statement.

•Edited the prose to ensure a neutral, encyclopaedic tone and correct English usage.

Despite this, the draft was declined for insufficient notability. Could you point me to the passages or sources that still fall short of Wikipedia’s standard? I have invested a great deal of time refining the article and would value any specific guidance you can offer before I resubmit.

Thank you for the work you do to keep the encyclopedia reliable, and for any direction you can provide.

Best regards, Vikiloger (talk) 06:02, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Hi @Vikiloger! I've taken a look at your draft's sources. As a piece of advice, you don't usually need that many sources to prove notability – three sources are usually enough, but what matters is the quality of these sources. You would want them to be independent, reliable, and talk in-depth about Arslan. That's also the reason why a "Media coverage" section isn't ideal – if the sources are in-depth, they will provide material that can be used to write about him, instead of just mentioning their existence.

[1] is a primary, self-published source, so doesn't count for notability. [2], [3] don't mention Arslan. [4], [5], [6] only mention him when listing the cast members, so not significant coverage. [7], [8], [9] actually don't list him in the cast, so don't verify the information, let alone providing significant coverage.

[10], [11], [12] also don't list him as one of the jurors. [13] is a link to watch the show, so not an independent source. [14] relies on what Arslan says about his own company, and reads a lot like a press release. [15], [16], [17] also read like advertisements, and might be paid articles, especially since I can't find any byline. [18] only mentions him in cast listings alongside many other actors, still no significant coverage. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 08:03, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]