User talk:Star Mississippi

Star Mississippi is busy and is going to be on Wikipedia in off-and-on doses, and may not respond swiftly to queries.

This page is automagically archived by a botservant. Really old archives are immediately below by year, month. 2010 and forward are in the box below. 2008:Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec, 2009: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

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

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22: 30 days

Request on 08:00:19, 2 March 2025 for assistance on AfC submission by Rachael Adrino

Rachael Adrino (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Winston Utomo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello there. First of all, thank you for the suggestions. For the article, by your latest message, what else should be added so that this article can stand alone or should it be combined with the IDN article with the current conditions? Since this is my first draft and previously this has been summarized according to the references because of the many promotional phrases in the early draft, do you have any additional suggestions for me, please?

Rachael Adrino (talk) 08:00, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Rachael Adrino. I don't think there's anything you can add. WP:NOPAGE is a good guideline for when to write a separate page and when to include the information in a broader topic, which makes it easier for the reader. Does that help? Happy to tag it for the merger if you'd like Star Mississippi 15:01, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then, I'll read it ASAP. One thing, is the merger page same with redirect page (when you click Winston Utomo, it will go to page IDN)? or in this case there are differents among them? Rachael Adrino (talk) 04:01, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the title will direct the reader to information about Utomo within the IDN article. In a merger, information is carried over whereas a redirect it's generally simply a pointer to an extant section Star Mississippi 13:52, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Resubmitting without any attempt at addressing the feedback is disruptive. Please stop, or you will be blocked entirely. Star Mississippi 14:51, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Star Mississippi, my appologize I've done that because I was still confused about the feasibility issue, and I only caught the intention of removing the business man category. Because I was also busy in the real life, I was too quick for making a decision to resubmit. Once again forgive me for that action. I will use the "advice" button which you've provided. Rachael Adrino (talk) 08:57, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March music

On Ravel's birthday, we also think of a conductor and five more composers ;) -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:29, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh thanks for this bit of music ed @Gerda Arendt. Sesquicentennial was a fun tongue twister a few years ago and now we're on to Semiquincentennial, which I imagine will apply too to some musicians. Star Mississippi 21:56, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Today I could have written five stories off the main page, and chose Sofia Gubaidulina. I find the TFA also interesting, and two DYK, and a birthday OTD. How about you? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:33, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Today: an opera, 100 years old OTD, on Bach's birthday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:02, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shades of my old elementary school music teacher who taught us to love the classics. Thank you for that good memory @Gerda Arendt Star Mississippi 13:51, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I love to hear that! - Today, 300 years of Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern, BWV 1! We sang works for (mostly) double choir by Pachelbel, Johann Christoph Bach, Kuhnau/Bach, Gounod and Rheinberger! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:41, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FloridaArmy Drafts

Mainspaced now

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Draft:J. R. Preston

I started a draft on this fellow a while back and would be happy to have some help with it. (Also posted this on Mississippi Wikiproject talk page). I hipe all is well. FloridaArmy (talk) 23:19, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @FloridaArmy. I'll try to get to this in the coming days and week. You know I love educators, so thanks for flagging. Star Mississippi 02:30, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Virtute et armis FloridaArmy (talk) 02:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Again! Got me hooked. I was able to free up some time and made some revisions to Draft:J. R. Preston. Hope this is a bit of a help getting this article to mainspace. Seems he is a truly notable person. It does still need some work, it feels like a credible start. — ERcheck (talk) 04:39, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wow Thank you @ERcheck. Great research. I do agree he's notable and apologies @FloridaArmy for letting this and others slip through cracks. Star Mississippi 14:22, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Think it is time to promote it to mainspace? — ERcheck (talk) 23:54, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I thought you were still working on it and didn't want to move mid work like our friend Mr. Moise. Feel free to move it when you're done or I'll do it when I log back on tomorrow morning @ERcheck Star Mississippi 02:32, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Looks like all is in order! These few biographies were fun to work on. — ERcheck (talk) 17:38, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Theodore Sydney Moïse

Any chance you or your page watchers could help with this declined draft? Several "further reading" sources are included. Thanks! FloridaArmy (talk) 00:03, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Star Mississippi. After you commented about the LRC on my talk page, I came over to your talk page and found this comment. Curious about the draft, I made some edits to Draft:Theodore Sydney Moïse. Check them out. Feels like notability has been established — he has a painting in the Metropolitan Museum of Art and one in the Smithsonian American Art Museum's collection. — ERcheck (talk) 05:18, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I firmly agree. Thanks so much @ERcheck for the eyes on it and the help. @FloridaArmy apologies for losing track of this one, I will move it now. Star Mississippi 01:52, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome! This was an interesting biography to work on. BTW, you moved the article in the middle of my making some additional edits. You may find the final section of the article interesting. — ERcheck (talk) 02:45, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wow, and personally so since I had a college friend who went to a school named for Grace Dodge! Love a good art mystery. The drafts @FloridaArmy flags are always fascinating in one manner or another, and they know I have a soft spot for the arts, as well as overlooked southern topics. Hopefully I didn't mess up your edit with the move. Star Mississippi 02:57, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks User:ERcheck! Nice work. Interesting entry. Hopefully some more of his art will be included in time. Thanks also to StarMississippi. Much appreciated. FloridaArmy (talk) 13:26, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are welome @FloridaArmy. — ERcheck (talk) 17:38, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Alice Josephine Tye Noel

I don't understand the submission denial rationale for the submitted draft and I think she belongs in mainspace. Ripe for expansion no doubt. FloridaArmy (talk) 15:42, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Looking into this and Moise who you flagged above. Apologies for delay, on wiki time has been somewhat limited. Star Mississippi 22:56, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the pings, FA. Wanted to restore this to work on. Star Mississippi 21:39, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At first I wondered about her individual notability, but reading the references, there was more to be told. I made a major re-write and believe it is ready for Mainspace. What do you think @Star Mississippi? — ERcheck (talk) 02:46, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to move it to Mainspace if you deem it ready. — ERcheck (talk) 16:41, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely and apologies for the delay on both @ERcheck. So glad our paths crossed as I was definitely unable to prioritize these great drafts. I've moved it. Star Mississippi 16:55, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Thanks for moving it! — ERcheck (talk) 17:38, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Temple High School (Mississippi)

Here's a former Mississippi high school with interesting history but rejected. FloridaArmy (talk) 18:34, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for flagging @FloridaArmy. I was offline for most of the holidays and @Ktkvtsh: got to this before I was able (thank you). Will see if there's anything I can add now that it's in mainspace. Star Mississippi 00:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you SM! You did such a nice job on Alfred Edgar Smith I am assigning you Draft:Valena C. Jones Normal School. No good deed goes unpunished! All is forgiven. I hope your year is going terrific. FloridaArmy (talk) 18:28, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I never mind homework :D and feel free to flag anything I can help with. I was reading the work of Candacy Taylor and Smith was mentioned. I was glad to see it was your draft since I knew you wouldn't mind my crashing it.

GOing to batch this with the others so neither they nor this archive like the first batch did. New Year is off to a healthy but suprisingly cold start. I hope you're also well. Star Mississippi 02:10, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drive by comment to myself to keep these from archiving Star Mississippi 03:35, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good one!, another, Direct detailing page 1, and page 2. These shpuld help a lot; this is direct detailing before opening! BusterD (talk) 11:47, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Richard Mafundi Lake

Slightly self serving here, but @FloridaArmy: and I have both been trying to get this one across the line after I read about him in Imani Perry's book. Any thoughts @ERCheck:? No worries if you're not interested or don't have bandwidth, just thought you might. Star Mississippi 02:31, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See Draft talk:Richard Mafundi Lake. Some thoughts — ERcheck (talk) 19:11, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Better than a mere mention, three years' earlier activism, from 1982, quote. BusterD (talk) 11:34, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Kate L. McLaurin

I would be glad to have help with this writer and dramatist who was born In Yazoo City according to IMDb. Is there an obituary out there somewhere? I couldn't find much about her but her plays garnered some attention and several were adapted to film. FloridaArmy (talk) 02:23, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

She looks interesting @FloridaArmy. Let me see what I can find. Thanks, as always, for flagging Star Mississippi 16:15, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I've clipped a death notice, an LA Times obit, and Yazoo City article. These should help fill the page out a bit. BusterD (talk) 11:06, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Star Mississippi - See looks interesting and the draft article is a good start.

Her death certificate is available on her Find-A-Grave page:

Find-A-Grave page
Death Certificate, she was married to Willard Robertson at the time of her death.

— ERcheck (talk) 19:29, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @BusterD & @ERcheck. Super helpful. @FloridaArmy I'll try to get to this next week. Until then my on wiki time is still somewhat limited. Star Mississippi 01:45, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

She looks like a cool subject. BusterD (talk) 01:58, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail!

Hello, Star Mississippi. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 21:22, 23 March 2025 (UTC). 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.

Extraordinary Writ (talk) 21:22, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the delay @Extraordinary Writ. I needed to get somewhere that I had access to that email account. Received with thanks! Star Mississippi 15:11, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion - new article on WWI vet

@Star Mississippi - I came across a WaPo article about a WWI veteran who lived to 107. At the time of his death, he was one of approximately 50 WWI vets still alive. Not the oldest, as there was a vet of age 114 still living. The article gives his interesting life story. His notability would be (1) living in 3 centuries, from 1898 to 2005; (2) one of approximately 50 WWI vets alive; and (3) the oldest WWI vet in Texas.

Question: Do you think an article would pass Wikipedia notability standards?

Washington Post article: Holley, Joe (January 21, 2006). "Past a Century, Veteran Stayed Inquisitive". Washington Post. Retrieved March 28, 2025.

— ERcheck (talk) 17:28, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Sorry my on wiki time has been limited but I'll look at this ASAP. Star Mississippi 13:39, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't forgotten. I will try to get to your request this week Star Mississippi 02:45, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @ERcheck

Apologies for the ridiculous delay. I know the discussions around supercenterians have been frought, but you present a good case here. I don't think it's a slam dunk yes, but based on what I saw and what I know of your writing, I'd !vote keep should someone bring it to AfD. There's some results clutter around this younger Ken Myers but I see enough on which to build an article. Star Mississippi 00:33, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for checking it out. FYI, the younger Ken Myers you mentioned is not directly related to the 107-year-old vet, as far as I can tell. — ERcheck (talk) 15:07, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jay Block Article and removal of edit block

Hello is it possible for you to remove an edit block pun intended on the article mentioned I wont mess with it like i did before unless it is absolutley necessary to maintain wikipedias neutrality. Is it possible to do. Dmesh2498 (talk) 19:40, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Dmesh2498 You're welcome to request an unblock and an administrator will review it.

I'd advise clearly explaining why you need to edit that article and can't just ignore its existence. Star Mississippi 13:36, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mainly if I needed to add a picture I uploaded to wikimedia to use on the article namely Senator Block during his military service in afghanistan that can be put under his early life section or even his military service record in the box. That is the only thing I intend to put in using two sources mentioned below in the article to maintain neutrality. Dmesh2498 (talk) 16:18, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dmesh2498: I don't think you should be editing that article in any case, since you seem to have an external relationship with the subject.

While I have you on the line, so to speak, can you tell me if you have, or have had in the past, other Wikipedia user account(s)? Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:40, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

yes i do he is a friend I campaigned for him. I am the associate not his other one I felt it was initially necessary to fix the original article that was a hit piece. Even for the sake of neutrality just be glad this aint the croatian wikipedia. Dmesh2498 (talk) 00:58, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dmesh2498 that indicates you should not be editing the page directly. You remain free to make edit requests if there are specific issues that need addressing. Star Mississippi 02:48, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dmesh2498 - I do not find any image of Senator Block from his military service on Wikimedia. — ERcheck (talk) 18:15, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, Star Mississippi. 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. — ERcheck (talk) 19:29, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A propos de l'article (Portuguese–Algerian War (1790–1813))

Bonjour, j'ai remarqué que vous avez supprimé l'article (Portuguese–Algerian War (1790–1813)). Dans un débat, un essai ou une discussion, un argument se compose généralement d'une affirmation, d'une preuve et d'une explication. L'absence d'arguments peut donc être perçue comme un manque de rigueur intellectuelle ou une tentative de persuasion sans fondement. Donc quels sont les arguments et les preuves historiques qui vous ont poussé à supprimer l'article Cordialement. Kingdz16 (talk) 23:07, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Kingdz16

The community decided at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Portuguese–Algerian War (1790–1813) that the article was not up to English wikipedia standards and there was no agreement on where to merge. If you believe my close was wrong - not simply that you disagree - you can open a deletion review but you'll need to post in English. Star Mississippi 12:01, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was possible to modify the title of the article and make some adjustments to the content by replacing certain terms with others. Quite unfortunate.

Kingdz16 (talk) 13:26, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again @Kingdz16

You're welcome to start again in draft space if you believe you can address the issues raised during the discussion. I'd recommend AfC to avoid a speedy deletion. Star Mississippi 13:21, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you.i'll do it Kingdz16 (talk) 13:27, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment

At User talk:82.42.38.65#Proof via credits. I feel a partial block at least is required. DareshMohan (talk) 08:15, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for flagging @DareshMohan and @Izno for handling as I was offline Star Mississippi 02:30, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:32, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Itzler reversion

Hello,

We've previously discussed said subject matter months ago and I noticed you again reverted the article. It should be noted that my changes are all sourced from the primary sources listed in the citations throughout the page. The infobox is a vital part of any individual's wikipedia article and I believe that my edit should be wholly reinstated.

Thank you, R. Clarke Robertclarke32 (talk) 03:31, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the information about his religion and multiple charges is not in the article. He is a BLP and as we discussed, it cannot be added if it's not suitable. If you continue to add it, you will lose access Star Mississippi 03:58, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The information about his religion and ethnic background is indeed in the article. In the third citation, https://nymag.com/nymetro/nightlife/sex/features/12193/ a line highlights his religious affiliation, " says Jason, “I would have been the greatest Richie Rich, because Lenny Sylk is the biggest thing in the Jewish community. He’s got a trust that gives money to stuff like the ballet, a house with an eighteen-car garage, and a helicopter landing pad. Golda Meir used to stay with us when she was in town.”" Lenny Sylk is his father, and his mother, who was also of Ashkenazi Jewish descent, as shown in the obituary for her late father. https://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/29/classified/paid-notice-deaths-lubell-nathan-nate.html

In the obituary the funeral was held by Gutterman and Musicant Jewish Funeral Directors.

In addition to this, his multiple charges is also covered in the NY Times article which is the second citation within the article, https://nymag.com/nymetro/nightlife/sex/features/12193/

"Since being revealed as a pimp... convicted the next year of attempting to promote prostitution, Mr. Itzler has repeatedly referred to himself in media interviews as a pimp and commented on the latest headline-grabbing prostitution cases.", and "He was indicted last summer on charges that he provided a prostitute to a customer... Mr. Itzler, prosecutors have said, visited the room twice and sold $4,700 worth of cocaine to the customer.", and finally, "Mr. Itzler pleaded guilty to promoting prostitution, criminal sale of a controlled substance and money laundering, and agreed to a minimum prison sentence of four years."

All information I added was not only suitable, but backed by prior citations linked to the wikipedia page. As I continue to attest to the fact that an infobox is not only a common but widely utilized element of many individual wikipedia articles I again request for you to reinstate my prior revision to the article. If you'd like, I could even add additional citations to my changes if that's more accommodating. Robertclarke32 (talk) 18:29, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to this, you also stated "Hi, apologies for the delay as I have been and am still mostly offline. You're welcome to reinstate the infobox."

Star Mississippi 02:11, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Now, I understand if you changed your mind but I'd again highly appreciate if you'd be willing to let this simple infobox get implemented alongside the very minor changes in the body of the article which I added according to the prior citations. Robertclarke32 (talk) 18:36, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again @Robertclarke32

You are using original research and synthesis to draw conclusions from sources, which is not allowed especially for a BLP. You're welcome to add the infobox as long as it is free of controversial information. Continued efforts to discuss religion and number of charges is in appropriate. I'd suggest a talk page discussion first to establish consensus, but will not remove the infobox should you choose to readd it within applicable guidelines Star Mississippi 21:58, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done.

Removed the parts deemed inappropriate and readded the infobox accordingly Robertclarke32 (talk) 22:51, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No issue with any of your edits @Robertclarke32. I wish there was a better source than the Post for the OD, but it is what it is. Star Mississippi 01:53, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just found out that he was recently charged with making a terroristic threat and two charges of criminal contempt. I am unsure whether to add this or not as he hasn't been convicted of said charges yet. (https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/webcrim_attorney/Detail?which=charge&docketNumber=gwMYjZ/NbWlPZxTDuhP5pA==&countyId=wTDNnHf/UHIgYlsGmMChHQ==&docketId=5GABnfgrxvGFE3Xs4_PLUS_V0_PLUS_w==&docketDseq=T/O1YN_PLUS_BG65HkOeqEnpAkw==&defendantName=Itzler,+Jason&court=Kings+Criminal+Court&courtType=U&recordType=U&recordNum=)

When and if convicted, would it be acceptable to add it to the article amongst his other prior charges? Robertclarke32 (talk) 19:56, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think per WP:PERP it's best to wait until the conviction happens, if it does. Contempt of court seems thin on its own, but that's just my opinion as a fellow editor. Star Mississippi 00:18, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Star Mississippi, why you say that I am a vandal on the Elbridge Colby page?

Please use Talk:Elbridge_Colby#WP:EL to keep the discussion about the link usage centralized Star Mississippi 14:49, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Star Mississippi, you locked the Elbridge Colby page and restored it to previous version by David Gerard. David Gerard removed these three links in the external links section of the page without giving any valid reason:

The United States should prioritize Taiwan over Ukraine, a 2023 opinion piece by Colby and Alex Velez-Green in The Washington Post
The Tragedy of Foreign-Policy Realism by Malcom Kyeyune
Elbridge Colby on Multipolarity Podcast

I RESTORED those links. I asked David Gerard why he removed the three links. He couldn't give valid reasons. Now you are siding with David Gerard. I want to know why. I didn't ADD NEW info into the page. I RESTORED previous deleted info that were deleted without valid reasons. Why I am vandal? The person that deleted info wasn't me, it was David Gerard. 138.75.27.166 (talk) 06:29, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher): WP:ELNO - those links are not supposed to be in the external links section. Vestrian24Bio 08:19, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I asked Star Mississippi, I didn't ask you. The three links are not fan sites, how do they violate ELNO? I don't understand. Can you clarify for me?138.75.27.166 (talk) 09:52, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If those links are usable, they should be references. External Links is not meant to be a collection of podcasts, opinion pieces. @David Gerard was correct in removing them and you were edit warring. If you continue to do so when the protection expires, you will be blocked. Anyone is welcome to respond, and I particularly appreciate @Vestrian24Bio doing so as I was offline. Star Mississippi 14:32, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Anyone is welcome to respond, and I particularly appreciate..."

YOU were the one that locked the Elbridge Colby page, Star Mississippi, I prefer YOU coming out to respond. I am confused when others respond, they were NOT the ones who LOCKED the page. You understand or not Star Mississippi? I want to hear the reason coming out of the mouth of the person who locked the page175.156.138.32 (talk) 11:50, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What wiki rules do those links violate exactly? Quote me something. Can you quote me something or not? Your reasoning is very weak Star Mississippi. David Gerard is correct how? I asked him for valid reasons and he can't even give me anything. You also can't give me anything.

No one can give me anything. David Gerard is correct because you said he is correct? That is your ridiculous reason star Mississippi?

175.156.138.32 (talk) 07:39, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Star Mississippi, you think you are correct, then open your mouth and quote me some solid wiki rules.175.156.138.32 (talk) 07:50, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The United States should prioritize Taiwan over Ukraine, a 2023 opinion piece by Colby and Alex Velez-Green in The Washington Post

The Tragedy of Foreign-Policy Realism by Malcom Kyeyune

Elbridge Colby on Multipolarity Podcast

These three links above, WHAT WIKI rules do they violate Star Mississippi? Do you even know?175.156.138.32 (talk) 07:50, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe they're eligible as references, please use them as such. Do not continue to edit war and dump them into external links. We do not need or want a collection of materials by a subject and it's on you to show why these three are needed. Currently consensus is against you. Re: others responding, that is frequently how conversations happen and it's welcome. Star Mississippi 12:35, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So you mean to say you can't quote ANY Wiki rules? It's all based on whim? And I am labelled as a "vandal"? DAVID GERARD of all people - also cannot give me any sort of valid reasons to delete those links - is correct? What kind of crap is that Star Mississippi? 175.156.138.32 (talk) 13:12, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Vestrian24Bio, David Gerard and I have all explained, including WP:ELNO

That you disagree doesn't change the situation. Star Mississippi 13:14, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More than vandalism, it's malicious vandalism. The frequency on en.wiki of such pov-pushing shapeshifters is precisely why semi-protection is such an essential wikitool. Using shifting IPs this person has repeatedly made direct personal attacks on David Gerard in edit summary (some of which I was forced to redact); these edits over several days demonstrate they do not appear to arguing from a motivation of trying to improve the pedia. I don't see them relaxing their stridency here. BusterD (talk) 13:29, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

lol. You talk so righteously. What wiki rule can you quote to delete the three links? I want to see. lol. Nothing but a load of rubbish from you BusterD. 175.156.138.32 (talk) 13:44, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion is not productive and we're going in circles. Please move on, IP. Star Mississippi 13:49, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How to move on like that? There is no justification for deleting the three links. I am labelled a "vandal" by the likes of BusterD. How to move on like that? 175.156.138.32 (talk) 13:52, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are channels available to you if you disagree with the protection. My Talk page is not one of them since you do not wish to listen to the answers. You can either request lessening at WP:RFPP or if you believe my decision was wrong, WP:AARV. Beware of boomerangs for the latter though. Star Mississippi 13:54, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very well. I am ready to meet things half way. By the way, you may not know, but this dispute was already resolved when David Gerard also suggested to use the three links as "ref" in the body of the article. I naively believed in David Gerard and used one the link as "ref" in the article. But David Gerard was not sincere. Once things cooled down a bit he immediately made up a pretext and removed the link that I used as "ref". This current round was started by David Gerard, not by me. I was angry when everybody sided with David Gerard despite the fact that he instigated the entire thing. I need guarantees that once I use the links as "ref", David Gerard will not pull his old tricks and delete them.175.156.138.32 (talk) 14:03, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IP 175: There are no guarantees anywhere (on this project, in life). But edit warring definitely won't solve it. You still have access to the article's Talk page. Use it to discuss the links with all of the editors engaged on the page and come to a consensus. Please stop describing others' edits as rubbish and crap. It is not productive. Star Mississippi 14:29, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very well. This will be my last reply here. If David Gerard removes the link that I will be using as "ref", I will refer the matter back here.175.156.138.32 (talk) 14:36, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While I welcome any good faith questions, please use Talk:Elbridge_Colby#WP:EL so everyone interested in the discussion can participate. Star Mississippi 14:37, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Explained what? No one explained anything to me. There are 19 points in the ELNO page:

copypasta

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a featured article. In other words, the site should not merely repeat information that is already or should be in the article. Links that may be used to improve the page in the future can be placed on the article's talk page.

Any site that misleads the reader by use of factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research, except to a limited extent in articles about the viewpoints that the site is presenting.

Sites containing malware, malicious scripts, trojan exploits, or content that is illegal to access in the United States. Suspected malware sites can be reported by following the instructions at Wikipedia:Spam blacklist.

Links mainly intended to promote a website, including online petitions and crowdfunding pages. See Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming.

Individual web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services, or to web pages with objectionable amounts of advertising. For example, the mobile phone article should not link to web pages that mostly promote or advertise cell-phone products or services.

Sites that require payment or registration to view the relevant content, unless the site itself is the subject of the article, or the link is a convenience link to a citation. See § Sites requiring registration.

Sites that are inaccessible to a substantial number of users, such as sites that work only with a specific browser or in a specific country.

Direct links to documents that require external applications or plugins to view the content, unless the article is about such file formats. See § Rich media for more details.

Any search results pages, such as links to individual website searches, search engines, search aggregators, or RSS feeds.

Shortcut

WP:NOSOCIAL

Social networking sites (such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram, and TikTok), chat or discussion forums/groups (such as Facebook Groups or email lists).

Shortcut

WP:NOBLOGS

Blogs, personal web pages, and most fansites (negative ones included), except those written by a recognized authority. (This exception for blogs, etc., controlled by recognized authorities is meant to be very limited; as a minimum standard, recognized authorities who are individuals always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for people.)

Open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors. Mirrors or forks of Wikipedia should not be linked.

Sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject: the link should be directly related to the subject of the article. A general site that has information about a variety of subjects should usually not be linked from an article on a more specific subject. Similarly, a website on a specific subject should usually not be linked from an article about a general subject. If a section of a general website is devoted to the subject of the article and meets the other criteria for linking, then that part of the site could be deep linked.

Lists of links to manufacturers, suppliers, or customers.

Sites already linked through Wikipedia sourcing tools. For example, instead of linking to a commercial book site, consider the "ISBN" linking format, which gives readers an opportunity to search a wide variety of free and non-free book sources. Map sources can be linked by using geographical coordinates.

Sites that are not reliably functional or not likely to continue being functional. For example, links to temporary internet content, where the link is unlikely to remain operable for a useful amount of time (e.g., Instagram Stories).

Affiliate, tracking or referral links, i.e., links that contain information about who is to be credited for readers that follow the link. If the source itself is helpful, use a neutral link without the tracking information.

External links on Wikipedia navigation templates or navigation pages such as disambiguation, redirect and category pages.

Websites of organizations mentioned in an article—unless they otherwise qualify as something that should be linked or considered.

The three links violated which rule How they did violate? What is the proof? Where is the evidence?175.156.138.32 (talk) 13:49, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, 175.156.138.32 has disqualified all of their many shifting IPs by personalizing every discussion they're in. Nobody cares what their opinion is, because they haven't themselves valued it sufficiently. BusterD (talk) 14:02, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Draft:Margaret Dwight Barrett

I don't know if she's Wikipedia notable but this lady is fascinating! I would love to interview her. I had a heck of a time tracking down who she is with various name changes and such.

I've also been cranking out some drafts on Mississippi related subjects that would be great to have help on:

FloridaArmy (talk) 13:55, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all of these. My on wiki time is still hit or miss, but will look as soon as I can. Flag away. Star Mississippi 15:17, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mass AfD noms

Thanks for closing the AN thread, but that's not what I was looking for. The reason I posted to AN rather than ANI is because I want help addressing the issue of sporadically active mass deletions. I think it's a LTA problem, designed to fly under SPI radar, that needs more eyes and more brains than just today's account. How do I get people interested in the (potential, but I'd say probable) bigger/subtler problem, rather than fixing the bright and shiny obvious problem from today? Jclemens (talk) 23:25, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Jclemens

I have no issue with you reopening it, but I think your framing here is better than there where several of us misread your post as thinking today's nom was an LTA under the same patterns when they turned out to be an editor with some poorly thought out noms. I'd actually suggest Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy or maybe one of the Village Pumps? There is a broader problem of mass noms, of which this is one type, as is a flood of songs on last Saturday's log. This was touched on in User_talk:Star_Mississippi/Archive_21#AFDLand because the issue is we don't have enough input and these floods make the problem worse. Is this helpful? Star Mississippi 00:11, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those are great suggestions, thanks. I'm afraid I don't keep track of as many different moving parts of Wikipedia as I used to. And no, reopening wouldn't likely be as helpful as looking into an alternate venue that's less decisive and more deliberative. Jclemens (talk) 01:02, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Less decisive and more deliberative is the perfect phrasing and need because I think we (as a community) aren't sure what the answer is. Pinging @OwenX and @SportingFlyer if they have any ideas as they've had some good input on current state of AfD. Star Mississippi 01:09, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping, Star! Low effort mass nominations should be recognized for their disruptive nature, and treated like any other form of disruption. WP:SK already addresses such nominations, but only on an individual basis. We like to separate content forums from conduct ones, but when an AfD is closed as Speedy keep per SK criteria #1 through #4, the closer should take a quick look to see if it was part of a mass nom campaign, and issue a warning or a project space block. Our policies already allow this, but it may be helpful to add a few words to WP:SK about it, and maybe create some user talk page templates specific to this type of warning and block. I mostly deal with the AfD backlog area, so I rarely see fresh ones. Jclemens, you are good with legislative wordsmithing. Perhaps try a BOLD addition to WP:SK? RFCs rarely get anywhere these days. Owen× ☎ 11:19, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, see Wikipedia talk:Speedy keep#Low-effort mass nominations for a start. Jclemens (talk) 22:34, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As is often the case with such RfCs, your proposal isn't judged based on whether it offers an incremental improvement, but whether it solves every possible problem we now have that anyone can think of. Sigh... Owen× ☎ 22:09, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see that picked up steam. I'll have a look later this week as I'm still mostly offline. Star Mississippi 00:46, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping! I've been on a bit of a wikibreak, but I agree - mass nominations without any effort are pretty clear and should generally be avoided. I'll look at the talk page though! SportingFlyer T·C 19:53, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RefTeX and MULE

Thanks for handling the above-noted mass AfD nominations. Per this comment of yours, would you please consider also speedy-keeping Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MULE (also no !votes yet, and I'm pretty sure there has been coverage in reliable sources) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RefTeX (a keep !vote from me, but when the article was nominated it already had two references to independent sources with significant coverage, and I've since added two more)? —Psychonaut (talk) 23:56, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Psychonaut

I just closed RefTeX as I must have missed that in their contributions, thanks for flagging. I have an issue with their spree, but on eyeing MULE, they may well be right. Or at least it's less obviously problematic sine sourcing is just to a conference paper. Searching is obviously a challenge given name, but if you find something I'm happy to speedy close it. I similarly left a couple of others i.e. The Witches of Breastwick, but have no issue if someone else opts to action or mass revert their noms. Star Mississippi 00:16, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm sure I remembered reading a lot about MULE 30 years ago, but it's hard to find online sources that old. Nonetheless, I did turn up an independently authored journal article and a book, as well as two peer-reviewed conference papers by the MULE authors, and mentioned these in the AfD. Perhaps you could have another look? —Psychonaut (talk) 01:24, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, @Psychonaut. Looked and closed.

(I guess we're both sufficiently old, although this one wasn't one I stumbed on that I recall) Star Mississippi 02:02, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! —Psychonaut (talk) 02:19, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Sikh–Wahhabi War

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Sikh–Wahhabi War. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. AlvaKedak (talk) 07:46, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @AlvaKedak. I'll respond there to keep it central Star Mississippi 01:31, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Better Than You Bay Bay

You've deleted Better Than You Bay Bay, an article that was listed at AfD with the only discussion being Support by @HHH Pedrigree. I'm not sure if it's really vaild to delete an article like that without really a consensus being made- i suggest you undelete the article and close the AfD as a no consensus instead. TzarN64 (talk) 21:17, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The AfD was opened for two whole weeks. NOW, you want a consensus, after two weeks??--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 21:24, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really fair to just delete a article with only 1 participant. There was not enough consensus made to lead to that decision just yet. TzarN64 (talk) 21:50, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is completely routine at AFD and normal. You'd be better off gathering sources to prove that the AFD missed something regarding WP:N. It's not about 'fairness', it's about a lack of notability being established. -- ferret (talk) 21:58, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Ferret for stepping in while I was offline.

@TzarN64 if you believe my close was incorrect, not simply that you disagree, you're welcome to file a Deletion Review. There was no one supporting retention after two weeks, and no indication further input was forthcoming. That is a delete outcome, not a no consensus. I second Ferret's recommendation to find sourcing and improve the article so that it's not subject to G4 if you opt to restore it. But as I said, you're welcome to use DRV. Star Mississippi 01:30, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Im extremely grateful you closed that an thread i am at whits end and was slowlyl falling apart you probably prevented me from doing something extremely stupid •Cyberwolf•. talk? 01:22, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome @Cyberwolf. Please log off and take care of yourself. Star Mississippi 01:31, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They are accusing me of sock puppetry now. I quit •Cyberwolf•. talk? 01:44, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure who "they" is @Cyberwolf, but I see @Rosguill and @Tamzin trying to help you, as well as @Liz. Please step back and take a break. Star Mississippi 02:45, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you accepting emails?

Hi Star,

I hope you're doing well. Well it's my second time here that I have not recieved any email back from you. I did wrote one on April 7. Would you mind checking it out? Cheers! Rejoy²⁰⁰³(talk) 05:47, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please leave your notes here @Rejoy2003 or at the Help Desk if better. I don't check email frequently and this way someone else can help you without waiting for me. I'm unfortunately not an efficient source of help, and would prefer to discuss all matters on wiki for equity. Star Mississippi 02:38, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025

@Star Mississippi Is there any rule regarding the colouring of tables in Wikipedia (tables means top of the tables — the headings)? XYZ 250706 (talk) 12:29, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an area I'm familiar with @XYZ 250706. Please ask at the Help Desk or Teahouse. Star Mississippi 00:31, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cumulative density function has an RfC

Cumulative density function has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Trovatore (talk) 21:34, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]