User talk:Praxidicae

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

"Cause I've met some people, okay? Real people, and I've got to tell you, a lot of them are fucking idiots" - Selina Meyer
"Even in Zero gravity, you're an asshole" - Cyril Figgis

Abigail Thorn as a playwright[edit]

So, a user decided to add that Abigail Thorn was a playwright and you reverted it and left a comment that just says "Definitely not" (Revision as of 18:49, 12 July 2022). Is there a policy on Wikipedia that prevents that change? Because Abigail literally wrote a play called "The Prince" that is going to be shown in a few months (as seen here, last paragraph), and playwright is literally just "a person who writes plays" by all dictionary definitions I have seen by searching, so saying "Definitely not" seems a bit... harsh? AnAkemie (talk) 03:04, 31 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

While I cannot speak for Praxidicae directly (and I do somewhat think the wording of her edit summary was overly critical), I agree that her revert was appropriate. Writing a single play does not make someone a playwright - it should be something that they are known for doing on a regular (or semi-regular) basis as part of "what they do". Your dictionary definition even agrees with us, in that the key word in a person who writes plays is plays (plural). Should Thorn start writing more plays and it becomes "her thing" then by all means the article can be changed to include it, but for now it should probably stay out of the lead and infobox. Primefac (talk) 07:49, 31 July 2022 (UTC) (talk page stalker)Reply[reply]
@Primefac Well, thank you for your response. I actually wanted to go to the talk page but Praxidicae seems to have way more experience, so it seemed better to just ask the rationale directly.
Anyway, I am not that convinced by an artist becoming an artist when they do a thing more than once. For example, an anonymous artist is still known by their artistic capabilities even when we may only know only one thing they have done. I would argue if the person did it in a professional way, once is enough to be considered an artist on that area.
That is exactly why I asked if there's a policy on that, because I think both of our views are correct in a way; it's more of a personal opinion. AnAkemie (talk) 14:49, 31 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AnAkemie: I think the relevant issue is more about relative coverage and characterization in reliable sources, rather than the dictionary definition of playwright.
If sources consistently define Thorn as a playwright, then the Wikipedia article should reflect that; otherwise it should not be used as a defining feature in the lead section. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography § Lead section says: Well-publicized recent events affecting a subject, whether controversial or not, should be kept in historical perspective. What is most recent is not necessarily what is most noteworthy: new information should be carefully balanced against old, with due weight accorded to each. Retro (talk | contribs) 00:39, 4 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Michael J Knowles[edit]

Also a copyvio link, NBC on this website. Doug Weller talk 16:23, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Moved to draft[edit]

Hello User:Praxidicae,

I have moved the article Draft:Prince Anthony Bart-Appiah back to draft to properly write it. The person passes Wikipedia:Notability per the sources provided. Thanks Geezygee (talk) 17:41, 2 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's still spam. You are not permitted to remove the tags on this account or any others you create. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:48, 2 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for the review[edit]

By more reliable sources, what do you mean, I cited newspapers from my country Caramel2155 (talk) 14:45, 4 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Praxidicae, Thank you for your comment[edit]

Hello, I would like to contact you regarding your feedback on Farouk Hosny Foundation which is a non-profit organization that promotes culture and arts in Egypt. It has a great impact on the cultural arena in Egypt and I think it is worth writing about on Wikipedia. My email is (Redacted). please feel free to contact me. Dina Al-Mahdy (talk) 16:07, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We will not contact you via email, and Wikipedia's inclusion policy has absolutely nothing to do with how "worthy" something is. We have articles on terrible things and terrible people. What matters is if a subject has been discussed at length in multiple third-party publications with editorial oversight. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 17:49, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Please explain why you're reverting my edits. The information is accurate and source I'm attempting to include is literally a post from a developer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sru111 (talkcontribs) 18:37, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Her words: "Once more unsourced cruft". You cite no sources and what you're adding doesn't help explain what the game or its setting is in broad strokes. We are a general encyclopaedia. Details should be put on a Paladins-focussed wiki, if one exists (and I'm fairly certain one does). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 18:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay wow, issues much? Anyone, as I was saying. You've got to be kidding me, the original version has zero sources itself, does a poor job of explaining things and outright says things that are false like the game having a sci-fi theme. Why was that original one even allowed in the first place? And what am I supposed to link to for in-game information? The Paladins wiki? I can't link to the game itself. Sru111 (talk) 18:58, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see they got blocked for a week. Doug Weller talk 20:16, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I guess calling everyone an asshole because they failed to read simple instructions didn't work out for them after all. PRAXIDICAE🌈 20:17, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Take a look[edit]

You might be interested in this because you submitted the last SPI and the sockmaster is back with another sock.[1]. DIVINE (talk) 17:16, 6 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Etsanyi Tukura[edit]

Hey, good morning from this end... Please what do you make of the above article? Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 04:29, 7 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Walled garden?[edit]

I think we may be dealing with a walled garden. Please let me know if you need more info. I respect your work as an editor - for a long time, altho we have never had an actual conversation to my memory. Netherzone (talk) 23:57, 7 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks! You mean with this? If so, I didn't look that hard, I just saw the raging advertisement and tagged. PRAXIDICAE🌈 23:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Have a look at the creators articles, they all (or many) promote one single person. If you have the time have a look at who shot the pix on those articles. Just a hunch, but it's pretty strong. Netherzone (talk) 00:04, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I saw your CSDs, thank you! I've tagged ten other creations with COI as part of the WP:WALLEDGARDEN. Netherzone (talk) 16:16, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah I'm slowly working my way through. It's pretty telling that they've all been deleted from itwiki too. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:17, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And then there are the photos, along with multiple scans of newspaper articles uploaded as "own work". I'll start tagging the pix. Netherzone (talk) 16:20, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bishop as CCS?[edit]

You undid a CSD of mine on a bishop that I didn’t think qualified as notable. I am not necessarily contesting your decision but trying to receive clarification. Do you think the biography meets the basic or additional criteria as stipulated by WP:BIO, and if so how? I couldn’t see how just by being a bishop a person was notable. —Caorongjin 💬 00:51, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is a WP:CCS which is not the same as WP:N. I don't feel strongly about the subject one way or another but if you do, I suggest AFDing it. PRAXIDICAE🌈 01:02, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. Helpful clarification. —Caorongjin 💬 01:14, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draft decline[edit]

I really don’t know which of the statement sounds more like an advertisement but I feel like removing some statement which I feel like in the article Draft:Iyanna Mayweather that might sound like an advertisement and resubmit again. Would that be a nice move ? Gabrielt@lk 14:27, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

she isn't notable, it's spam and obviously paid for PR. That's the last I'm going to say on this subject and your transparent attempt to sock with images on Commons leaves me concerned about your truthfulness with regard to being paid. PRAXIDICAE🌈 14:28, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kathleen Robb[edit]

Hello - the copyvio report is still connected with an old version of the article and I can't see how to rerun it for the current version - can you please take a look? Ta! Zeromonk (talk) 14:57, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah - I've found how: Now only showing as violation possible and most of the overlaps are job titles. Would be grateful for your removal of SD nomination and support to make a few more adjustments to improve the article. Zeromonk (talk) 15:01, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Zeromonk: whether the copyvio detector says 'possible' or 'likely' or whatever, isn't really the point; the fact remains that there are significant similarities in the text, with multiple sentences or sentence fragments appearing verbatim. Close paraphrasing is still a copyvio, AFAIK. I'm not sure why you're asking for Praxidicae to remove the speedy tag (after all, I put it there, and you can remove it yourself if you want), but I am saying I for one wouldn't. If the attending admin decides against it in the end, then so be it, but I think it's at least prudent to flag up this issue.
On a separate but related point, I've left a comment on your talk page about the way this AfC was handled, which still baffles me. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:18, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@DoubleGrazing: apologies for the way I've handled this, it was with genuine good intentions but I can see that it has been less than ideal! I believe you have not yet seen my reply and apologies on your talk page. Sorry all. Any advice on how to proceed to make improvements to the article would be gratefully received. Zeromonk (talk) 15:26, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Zeromonk From my side we're good; just a bit of cross-purposes. I'm still going to leave the speedy request there, though. If someone else wants to remove it, be my guest. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:34, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@DoubleGrazing thanks! I think it'll be most appropriate for me to leave the request too for a third party to assess. Hopefully they will see this context (see also my Talk page with explanation!) and help / make recommendations. Thanks all for your patience with this and sorry again! Zeromonk (talk) 15:38, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I am unsure why my edit for recession was reverted Eastonio Thomasito (talk) 19:40, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's explained on the talk page, your talk page and in the edit summaries. I will not discuss it further here. Your only option is to gain consensus with SOURCES on the talk page of the article. PRAXIDICAE🌈 19:42, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(by talk reader) @Eastonio Thomasito: Wikipedia's newsletter, The Signpost, has an op-ed about that. Chris Troutman (talk) 19:42, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


why??? Dazaew26h (talk) 23:15, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Read the declines. It's pretty simple "why." If you continue to submit garbage like this, you'll be blocked sooner rather than later. Don't waste our reviewers time with this nonsense. PRAXIDICAE🌈 23:16, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
your mean, dont bite the newcomers. Dazaew26h (talk) 23:18, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Newcomers don't use WP:BITE, but no one is being mean. You're being disruptive and being told as much. PRAXIDICAE🌈 23:18, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
well obviously you and others don't accept me here... Dazaew26h (talk) 23:19, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not if you're gonna continue creating garbage sourced to fandom, you're probably right. PRAXIDICAE🌈 23:20, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
fandom is a wiki buddy not"garbage", K? Dazaew26h (talk) 23:23, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's garbage, and it can't be used as a source here. Go edit there if you think it's so wonderful. Wikipedia is an actual encyclopedia which requires reliable sources. PRAXIDICAE🌈 23:25, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree with you Praxidicae Favouredprince (talk) 00:29, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Help create page[edit]

Please, I will want to request that you help create a page with the title DJ Kelblizz, you have account creation rights , the page has been previously deleted because there was not much references Favouredprince (talk) 00:26, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I won't be doing that. And neither will you. PRAXIDICAE🌈 00:26, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How do you mean please Favouredprince (talk) 00:32, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Following you around[edit]

I had a small chuckle at this warning you left on a user talk page. It occurred to me that I also "follow you around" quite a bit, but in my case it's because you tend to leave behind you a trail of work for administrators to pick up! ~Anachronist (talk) 04:36, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hehe, sorry :P PRAXIDICAE🌈 12:32, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why leaving Nyombi Morris Page in draft[edit]

He Praxidicae, I hope you are doing something better for his page but not deleting it, yesterday I discovered that Nyombi's Wikipedia page wasn't visible on google, I went ahead to check on it via Wikipedia and it was no were to be seen, till I saw that you dropped in a draft, we are not sure why my question is what are your plans? and how long will it be in the draft? Alien234 (talk) 09:59, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draft: Raken (software)[edit]

Hi, my submission was recently not accepted for being “not adequately supported by reliable sources” and “appears to read more like an advertisement.” I would like to get some feedback on which sources are considered unreliable, as I made sure to check that all websites cited have been used as citations in other published Wikipedia pages. Also I'd like to know which portions of the page read as an advertisement so they can either be removed or rewritten. Thanks for your help! Jvolza (talk) 15:39, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2022 Crypto Crash[edit]

Hey, I was just curious why you reverted my edits on the page about cryptocurrency bubbles? You said they were overlinked (though only 2 of them were linked to the same website) and irrelevant when I was showing companies that halted trading as a result of extreme market conditions as well as other events putting pressure on the consumer and weaken opinions on companies like hacks. Just curious why you reverted those edits.

Jamisonsupame (talk) 16:16, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Spam designation of ImmunoFrontiers[edit]

So I'll be honest, I had no idea why you thought that website was "spam" specifically, and why you seemed pretty convicted about that. I've been scratching my head the last couple days. I expected that you were somehow at odds with the content change and the site specifically was just an excuse, but it turned out you literally just didn't like the site? On a whim I just turned off adblock. Ah... haha... it all makes sense now. Yes, the site looks very spammy. Not just a little bit, but a lot. My apologies. --Elephanthunter (talk) 16:55, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An easy way to tell whether something like that is spam is also by searching the content, it's usually scraped from other sites, though in this case, I looked at their "following" and registration date(s) and it's pretty evident from that alone it's both spam and unreliable. I have adblock on so I'm not sure what you're seeing but I'll take your word for it. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:58, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi, i had suggested quotations, was there a problem with it because I know that Wikipedia has certain rules

And put that suggestion to improve the article or was it useless or was there something wrong with it??🤔🤔 (talk) 18:17, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gonna need more context...what are you talking about? PRAXIDICAE🌈 18:18, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well I was talking about the revert you made in the talk page of the article"robot" — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:26, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

COI Tag[edit]

Hi Praxidicae, as you added COI tag on The Chenab Times which was created by me through AfC as a part of number of articles focused on WP:CVJK, a WikiProject which focuses articles related to Chenab Valley in Jammu and Kashmir. I am aware of Conflict of Interest and when I have any link with any article, I will declare as per WP:DCOI. Thank you.❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 08:56, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Praxidicae Can I get response? ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 13:44, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request on 12:55:05, 10 August 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by CheyenneDeBolt[edit]

Hello, I would like help understanding why my sources are not reliable. These sources are news papers and the subject of my Wikipedia page is focus of all the articles used. Other sources used were direct links to his repertoire. Any advice and assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

CheyenneDeBolt (talk) 12:55, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Winston Sterzel[edit]

Hello, I noticed you whole-sale reverted my edits on the page, most of which was removal of unsourced/unreliable information. Please check the sources for yourself, most of them either do not support the statements made or are dead links. Chrisanthusjohn (talk) 18:41, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I restored sourced information - there is no indication that the sources you removed except Medium are unreliable. I suggest you stop and get consensus about the other sources at WP:RSN and on the talk page before your remove content again. Dead links are also not a reason to remove - we have for a reason. PRAXIDICAE🌈 18:42, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dude, please check the sources. None of them load the article. They are dead links. Chrisanthusjohn (talk) 18:52, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What part of "we do not remove dead links simply for being dead" is unclear to you, @Chrisanthusjohn? WP:DEADLINK. I was able to find all of the sources in the archive with one click. I suggest you find our relevant policy on this and read it. PRAXIDICAE🌈 18:54, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(by talk reader) @Chrisanthusjohn: WP:DEADLINK. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:55, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
More specifically Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Preventing_and_repairing_dead_links Do not delete a citation merely because the URL is not working. Dead links should be repaired or replaced if possible. If you encounter a dead URL being used as a reliable source to support article content, follow these steps prior to deleting it: PRAXIDICAE🌈 18:56, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah okay, my mistake. Please add the archive links then. I'm not sure how to. Chrisanthusjohn (talk) 18:56, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Chrisanthusjohn but this doesn't explain your insistence that the sources you're removing are inherently unreliable. You said they're unreliable and dead links. So you need to explain on the talk page of the article where I've opened a discussion. PRAXIDICAE🌈 18:58, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Chrisanthusjohn: While it is up to Praxidica to say whether being referred to as a "dude" is OK or not, I do note that the many number of times she has been addressed as "Respected Sir" did have had the benefit of least being being 50% right.--Shirt58 (talk) 10:02, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah, sincere apologies. Didn't mean to misgender. I use "guys" and "dude" as gender-neutral terms in my everyday speech but I can see how that could be problematic. Chrisanthusjohn (talk) 14:43, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

SPI duplicate report[edit]

Sorry about the duplicate report on the Kew OhSo SPI. Twinkle doesn’t indicate that one is already there (unlike username reports). There already is a bug report filed [2]. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:50, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shikagami03[edit]

Please may I ask you to have a look at this, perhaps in your SPI role, perhaps as an ordinary editor, as you see fit. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:24, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why draft tag Nyombi[edit]

You recently went ahead and dropped the nyombi morris account in the draft, I sent you a message and you acted like you didn't see, stop your childish games on people's profiles, if you can't fix the issue chill people's accounts brother your not the only expert here. stop acting like God. And if you want his profile to be delete, delete it direct stop passing through the corner Alien234 (talk) 04:19, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We don't do "profiles". We're an encyclopaedia project, and that means we have to rely on in-depth, non-routine, independent news/scholarly sources written by identifiable authors and subjected to rigourous fact-checking. None of your sources meet any of those prongs.Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 05:19, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
First of all, I'm not your brother. Second, please read what Jeske said. PRAXIDICAE🌈 14:02, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
First of all you don't need to be my brother because you mean nothing to so don't think its huge if i use bro, second, we don't understand why you want to keep nyombi's page in isolation, people have been adding and removing all the so called urls you mentioned but we don't see his page being approved, you can't tell me someone who has been featured, on BBC, CNN, CBC News, WION,Doha debate, Global Citizen, TRT World, TED, award winner, and has a verified twitter account, but has a fake wikipedia profile, like seriously to me i see this has a sign of discrimination. which we don't want to see on wiki. You can't just delete his page and if you think you are going to delete his profile, then we ae going to see, you don't own wiki be reminded. Alien234 (talk) 12:51, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(by talk reader) @Alien234: I would love to know what you think you're going to do about this. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:04, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'd like to know too. Enlighten us, @Alien234. PRAXIDICAE🌈 21:05, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Regard to St.Bernard Parish Public Schools[edit]

Why won’t you allow me to update necessary changes to this page? Tonick28 (talk) 21:54, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You clearly are paid/have a COI and don't understand the purpose of Wikipedia as evidenced by your repeat promotional edits and failure to actually communicate or disclose per our WP:TOU. I've already requested a block of your account. PRAXIDICAE🌈 21:55, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So you think I’m being paid?! Where is the evidence? I simply did research. The page is so out of date. Tonick28 (talk) 22:04, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also, I’d love to learn more about Wikipedia. Where do I start? I’ve always wanted to be an editor for Wikipedia. Help me out. Tonick28 (talk) 22:07, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Animal Farm[edit]

Hi, you were fast! It has taken you 8 minutes to revert my edit as 'not neutral'. Have you ever read Soviet-era poems praising Stalin? Minimus' poem 'Comrade Napoleon' is an exact copy of them. 'Napoleon's favourite sow' is 'not neutral'? Ask publishers to edit Chapter X of the book. Doctor Gregory (talk) 22:14, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Still, countless Soviet poets willingly or unwillingly did so, and Orwell skilfully imitated their style and language. is not neutrally written. Period. PRAXIDICAE🌈 22:15, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is a fact, though. --Doctor Gregory (talk) 22:18, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
According to who? Who said these exact words? PRAXIDICAE🌈 22:19, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Seems you are not familiar with Soviet poetry of that time. I presume a 'sow' is also not neutral, period? Doctor Gregory (talk) 22:23, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It seems you do not understand the policy of summarizing what reliable sources say in a neutral manner. I'm not interested in continuing this discussion with you here. PRAXIDICAE🌈 22:23, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Eric Nam Page[edit]

Hi Praxidicae, I'm confused as to why you are reversing my edits on Eric Nam's page. I have disclosed my affiliation since you made me aware of the requirement, but NONE of the edits I have made have been promotional. In all cases I simply expanded upon and added context/sources to sections that were already existent on Eric's page. All additions to the page were also of public knowledge.

Could you please explain why this is seen as promotional?

Thank you Ednam100 (talk) 22:39, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You need to request changes on the talk page, as you've done and wait for an editor who isn't affiliated with you or your client to respond. PRAXIDICAE🌈 22:40, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, thanks. Ednam100 (talk) 23:00, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

August 2022[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. FAdesdae378 (talk · contribs) 23:19, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

First of all @FAdesdae378WP:DTTR, second of all if you bothered to read the edit, you'd see that it clearly wasn't meant to be posted on that MFD. PRAXIDICAE🌈 23:20, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aglet App Page Deletion[edit]

Super curios why you moved this to speedy deletion. Articles are sourced. Format matches many other gaming and app companies. Nothing seems to trigger any major issues based on the criteria for speedy deletion as noted on the Wikipedia page fr such things. Any context you can offer? JHKeel (talk) 01:03, 13 August 2022 (UTC) JHKeelReply[reply]

1.) It's completely promotional 2.) as a paid editor you need to go through the WP:AFC process 3.) he sourcing is abysmal, it's all PR nonsense. PRAXIDICAE🌈 01:04, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:David Adler.jpg[edit]

This file was given by the owner of this article. He directly hired me for edit this article. What kind of information do you need to proof that the image doesn't contain Copyright issue? DavidBasser (talk) 17:25, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Great, that doesn't mean he owns the copyright. Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for relevant information on how the copyright owner (ie. photographer) can release the rights. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:33, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So how do I connect you with the copyright holder for release this file? DavidBasser (talk) 17:36, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Read the directions. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:37, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi Praxidicae, you may want to take a quick look at the above article which has just been created... you seem to have some history a couple of years back with its obviously COI creator. The article doesn't look any better to me now, and some other editors have also noticed that it just reads like a company's "about us" webpage and tagged it accordingly. All the sources are primary, being interviews with the company founders, or articles written by the company - CODIX even appear to be sponsor members of the FCI source, so definitely not independent. Richard3120 (talk) 22:11, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Chenab Times[edit]

Could you point me to the evidence that there's a COI paid editing going on? Maybe I'm missing something but reading the edit summaries and the sources everything seems innocuous to me. Chrisanthusjohn (talk) 22:28, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, because it's private evidence that I have sent to arbcom, as I noted in my edit summary. PRAXIDICAE🌈 00:00, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah okay, didn't know that the evidence was private. Cheers Chrisanthusjohn (talk) 01:24, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Return Nyombi Online[edit]

We don't understand why you want to keep nyombi's page in isolation, people have tried adding and removing all the so-called URLs you mentioned but we don't see his page is approved, you can't tell me someone who has been featured, on BBC, CNN, CBC News,Earth.Org, WION, Global Citizen, TRT World, TED, award winner, and has a verified Twitter account, but has a fake Wikipedia profile links, like seriously to me I see this has a sign of discrimination. which we don't want to see on the wiki. You can't just drop Nyombi's page in draft for so long man style up.

Do you want to tell us all those journalists that wrote about him on the articles we see on google there not legit, you said all links are not legit haha unless you on a global journalist recruitment that you know all legit journalist in this world. also how do you identify a true journalist? Alien234 (talk) 13:05, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Who is this "We" you keep talking about? Wikipedia doesn't look to highly on paid editors and SEO firms trying to promote particular people.
Additionally, I don't think you are going to get your desired outcome from Praxidicae. It may be best to leave them alone. Bkissin (talk) 13:33, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

KraneShares Undisclosed paid tag[edit]

Hi! I hope you are having a good day! I was just wondering if the Undisclosed paid tag that you put on the KraneShares article referred to me? If so, what in your opinion would be the most productive way for me to respond? I have not been paid nor do I have a COI. After reading a few pages of your talk page I feel like just saying "I don't have a COI, trust me" is not particularly useful. any words of advice would be tremendously helpful. Thank you <3 Seigerman (talk) 15:13, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kleiner Device Labs[edit]

Please review my responses to your speedy delete nomination. Stupac88 (talk) 16:25, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Stupac88 please review WP:PAID and WP:COI. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:26, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, I reviewed those. This is not a paid post or a conflict of interest. Stupac88 (talk) 16:31, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So what is your connection then? PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:31, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

One of my childhood friends died of opiate addiction, and he got started after a failed back surgery. The success rates on these surgeries has been historically low, and the initial evidence behind the technology seems promising. What is your connection to this? Stupac88 (talk) 16:50, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Andrew B.Lawson[edit]

Hello PRAXIDICAE🌈, Hope you are doing great. I was just wondering if the Undisclosed paid tag that you put on the [[Andrew B.Lawson]] article. I am a cousin to Dr. Andrew Lawson, there is no else conflict of interest nor paid publishing. As you can see that he is notable and having credible work that's why I have created a page for him. I have tried my best to write the neutral article, if there is any issue with the writing so you can tell me to fix it otherwise kindly remove the tag because it is not a paid promo, it is just to show his credible work to globally.Blaze Reed345 (talk) 20:49, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've emailed the evidence to arbcom, you know why. PRAXIDICAE🌈 20:50, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is Taiba Sheheryar also your cousin, Blaze Reed345? PRAXIDICAE🌈 20:51, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PRAXIDICAE🌈, I don;t know who you are referring too, I just write the article about Andrew B.Lawson. I don'y know who he is.Blaze Reed345 (talk) 21:01, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Blaze Reed345 So your account is compromised? You didn't create fr:Taiba Sheheryar? Interesting. PRAXIDICAE🌈 21:03, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just created the French version but why you are deleting it? It doesn't make sense to delete the notable articles. If the you can create the articles, why we can't create either the persons are notable. You can tell me the right way, what I need to do instead of deleting the notable article which is already live. Blaze Reed345 (talk) 21:12, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just advice me what I need to do so the article not get deletedBlaze Reed345 (talk) 21:13, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You know exactly why "NCT". PRAXIDICAE🌈 21:14, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
But atleast you can advice instead of deletingBlaze Reed345 (talk) 21:16, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not going to advise you on how to continue to scam clients and abuse Wikipedia. Go away. PRAXIDICAE🌈 21:17, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am not scamming the clients. I am always taking notable clients and you know that, you are the one who deleting the articles of my notable clientsBlaze Reed345 (talk) 21:18, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Glad to see you're admitting you're violating your last set of blocks. I will say it once more: go away. I will never help you. PRAXIDICAE🌈 21:19, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thats so rude of you. Atleast don;t delete the previous pages which are notable and live from months. Why you are taking down?Blaze Reed345 (talk) 21:21, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's sorude. Why you are continuously deleting my previous pages one by one even they are live before months. Doesn;t make sense. Blaze Reed345 (talk) 21:20, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You're the one who tells your clients: I would like to tell you over here that, I am an expert Wikipedia publisher, so figure it out. You are lying to your clients and scamming them, while simultaneously abusing Wikipedia and expecting volunteer editors like myself to clean up after you so you can get paid. PRAXIDICAE🌈 21:22, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Abbas Haider[edit]

Hi, you tagged the page with speedy deletion and didn't even saw the references? The article clearly cited several notable platforms and complies with WP:GNG. The subject is covered in depth in all the references. WforWriter (talk) 21:57, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The references suck for lack of a better word and you should know better considering you're paid. PRAXIDICAE🌈 21:59, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


[3] Why? This fits none of the criteria in WP:ROLLBACKUSE. (talk) 22:04, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Accusation of bad faith at Talk:Herschel Walker[edit]

In response to this comment you made, I don't edit under an ideology on Wikipedia. Also you should not make misconduct accusations against other users in an article talk discussion. That's inappropriate conduct and only inflames content disputes and can be seen as uncivil. I would appreciate it if you struck the comment Iamreallygoodatcheckerst@lk 23:08, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I stand by what I said, especially given other things on your talk page that make me less inclined to believe you are editing without an agenda. PRAXIDICAE🌈 23:08, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you don't think someone can mature or change from age 14, you'd be mistaken. Editing under an agenda is a serious accusation that should be substantiated, and you have no evidence of that. Iamreallygoodatcheckerst@lk 23:11, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sure, it can be substantiated by your many edits and the fact that the bulk of all your edits are to American politics, especially combined with statements from your userpage. One does not have to say "I am editing with an agenda" for agenda driven edits to be obvious (and to be pointed out.) PRAXIDICAE🌈 23:14, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Praxidicae and Iamreallygoodatcheckers: (Non-administrator comment) I notice this is quickly turning heated and I don't want more people shouting at ANI, so I'm going to opin on the article dispute and say that from the sources that Praxidicae provided Herschel's position on abortion is due. Iamreallygoodatcheckers, you also said that USA Today piece looks pretty good, so I know you agree with her to an extent and I hope you can consider the other three four sources she provided. Sorry for butting in. — Coolperson177 (t|c) 23:22, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay so about my Fred Osmond article[edit]

So I have heard that you putted the Osmond article in the draft I understand that the problems were that I didn’t use reliable sources and I’m sorry not much info about Osmond and the other articles at hand that I’ve worked on so could you plz help on the article plz I just feel like they can stay if they have notable changes Thank you.

- Jaydenstyy Jaydenstyy (talk) 04:50, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And yet you've continued to add the article about him elsewhere and restore it without sources, @Jaydenstyy. Frankly, I don't believe you've learned anything. PRAXIDICAE🌈 12:31, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Orkhan Mammadov[edit]

Hello Praxidicae. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Orkhan Mammadov, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: This is just not spammy. It's a short bio which is encylopedic, and then a short career history. He may well not be notable, but there's credible indication as president of the AZ Futsal assoc. Needs to go to AfD. Thank you. GedUK  13:45, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I seriously question if you're reading these articles at all. PRAXIDICAE🌈 13:46, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Check in for mail[edit]

Hello, Praxidicae. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Sarrail (talk) 14:07, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nicosia Mall[edit]

Thanks for nominating Nicosia Mall for speedy deletion. I had done the same earlier, via NPP Page Curation, and tried to explain (here) to the article's creator about its promotional tone. Once it was REFUNDed, and tagged again, I removed the speedy tag so that I could then draftify the article, and potentially work with the editor on a nPOV, appropriately sourced article. You and I were clearly editing simultaneously at one point, both trying to remove the offending text (you won). Hopefully, the draftification will allow a more appropriate article to emerge. Best wishes. Paul W (talk) 15:26, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not hopeful about the creator though given this PRAXIDICAE🌈 15:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]