I would like to request a review of the G11 speedy deletion tag to this page.
This draft has been created so as to eliminate any promotional/advertising framing and now summarises coverage from multiple independent, reliable secondary sources. The article emphasises third-party coverage rather than self-described achievements and includes an explicit limitation of available coverage.
As the creator of the page, I understand I cannot remove the tag myself. I request a further review of the current version and a subsequent removal the speedy deletion tag if they agree it no longer meets the criteria for CSD G11.
Hello GPL93. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Andrew Richard Wood, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 21:56, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
Hi GPL93. I wanted to let you know that I removed removed the CSD tag you placed on the above page, because I don't think that it was unambiguous advertising. You can nominate it at Mfd if you still want it to be deleted. Chess enjoyer (talk) 22:26, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
Women in Red - March 2026
Women in Red | March 2026, Vol 12, Issue 3, Nos 358, 359, 364, 365, 366
Hello, GPL93. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Tyler Atkinson, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it againor request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:08, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
There is no basis for your deletion. You keep mentioning an exclusionary list, but have not presented. The record section is there for a reason. These are 100+ year records, for 1,000s of teams, essentially the highest record honors a coach can earn, only other is the NCAA all time wins leader. One person. That is the list you are maintaining? Only one person. Please present me the link youre mentioning. Centurion Seraph (talk) 17:42, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
Once again youre suggesting there is a rule or exclusionary list. I believe it should absolutely be included on their pages. You recognize them by two things: national championships and all-time wins records. To say because somebody didnt take the time to add on another separate article means it is prohibited is hardly accurate. You deleted an established section of records which had been in the infobox for months, with many and the most senior editors seeing no grounds to delete. Then you delete yourself and say start a discussion if you want it included, disregarding and stating generally or always has been excluded with no proof. & to say I need to others’ permission by starting a discussion for you to stop deleting them. Shouldnt you start a discussion on whether to delete an established section based on your belief some other pages dont have records listed. As I said, these are 100+ year records and some of the highest honors for a coach. There is nothing to say they dont belong that you have presented. I fail to see the problem with this article. Centurion Seraph (talk) 18:49, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
Centurion Seraph THEN CREATE A CONSENSUS FOR INCLUSION! There have been many editors over many years who have decided these are not to be included. The editorial standard has been not to include, where is the proof that explicitly says these records should be included? GPL93 (talk) 19:13, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
Records is listed four separate times in the template for records!! e.g. “Records
Most wins in Michigan history (194)”
You dont even have to imagine another team. These are 100% listed in the template, aside from the fact we dont generate lists of things we can do. We have lists of things forbidden, and you have not shown anything. To the contrary, it is the standard to include per the template. Centurion Seraph (talk) 21:11, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
Is it actually used in practice though? Because actual editing history leans towards not including. I'll create a consensus discussion anyway. Best, GPL93 (talk) 23:09, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
Edit warring
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war, according to the reverts you've made to Dusty May. This means that you are repeatedly reverting content back to how you think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree. Once it is known that there is a disagreement, users are expected to collaborate with others, avoid editing disruptively, and try to reach a consensus – rather than repeatedly reverting the changes made by other users.
Important points to note:
Edit warring is disruptive behavior – regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not engage in edit warring – even if you believe that you are right.
You need to discuss the disagreement on the article's talk page and work towards a revision that represents consensus among everyone involved. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution if discussions reach an impasse. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to engage in edit warring, you may be blocked from editing. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:48, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
@Hammersoft: The addition of the conference and school references is against the norm regarding college basketball coaches. I have advised User:Centurion Seraph to start a consensus discussion, but in the meantime would it make sense to remove the school and conference records from the infobox given that no prominent coach has them included (ex: Tom Izzo, Mike Krzyzewski, Jay Wright, John Wooden, etc.) and for players even NCAA career records aren't to be included in the infobox. Best, GPL93 (talk) 18:07, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
I'm not involved in this dispute from the stand point of content. I'm interested in the edit war stopping. Both you and User:Centurion Seraph keep reverting each other. This ends now. Please follow WP:DR. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:27, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
@Hammersoft: Then the conference and school records need to be removed until a consensus is reached as keeping these in the infobox would be an abnormality. If you look atCenturion Seraph's talk page there are multiple instances of edit-warring. Editors Cbl62 & Jweiss11 have confronted them multiple times regarding various editing issues, including edit-warring. Best, GPL93 (talk) 18:34, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
I'm not inclined to block now. I am inclined to the discussion continuing, without further reversions. I would recommend this discussion be moved to Talk:Dusty May. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:35, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
@Hammersoft: I am not asking for a block. I am asking that the infobox content involved be removed for the time being given there is a precedent of not including them. If Centurion Seraph can form a consensus for inclusion then they can be added back. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:59, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
To the contrary, Template:Infobox college coach lists “records” four separate times as grounds for inclusion. Including the exact records being labeled as unprecedented are used in an example on what to include. Centurion Seraph (talk) 21:24, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
I will say again, both of you need to move this discussion to Talk:Dusty May. It's obvious there's no moving the needle on your opinions with each other. Get others involved, and if nobody contributes then start an RfC. Talking past each other isn't going to achieve anything. --Hammersoft (talk) 00:29, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. LizRead!Talk! 05:14, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
Hello GPL93, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Mitratech Legal, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. CoconutOctopustalk 20:23, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
Women in Red – May 2026
Women in Red | May 2026, Vol 12, Issue 5, Nos 358, 359, 370, 371, 372
Struggling to find scientific works to write about? Start with review articles or textbooks, which may highlight influential studies, theories or methods by women.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time.
This is an automated notification. Please refer to the page's history for further information. DatBot (talk) 00:34, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
Need help for create article
Hello!
I noticed that the page for Michael Carbonara currently redirects to the 2026 United States House of Representatives elections in Florida article.
I have been gathering extensive biographical information and secondary sources to draft a standalone article for him. Before I proceed with "breaking" the redirect and publishing the draft, I wanted to consult with you or the community regarding his notability status.
While I understand he is a candidate in the upcoming elections, my research suggests he may meet the criteria for a separate article based on his professional background and significant media coverage independent of the election cycle.
Do you believe a standalone article is justified at this stage, or is it preferred to keep the information merged within the election page until further developments? I would appreciate your guidance on how to best contribute this content without violating Wikipedia's consensus on political candidates.
Best regards Grcnfat (talk) 10:35, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
Hello, GPL93. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ian Premer, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it againor request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:07, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
This popped back up
Looking through my old speedies, I came up with this bluelink: Draft:Kezias Kazuba Mwale. You tagged it as G11 in December.
I do believe the sourcing is better, but this may be sockpuppetry from the original page creator. Same sort of self-created image (but they've shucked the metadata).
What do you think? BusterD (talk) 01:37, 14 May 2026 (UTC)
While in your space, you ever give the mop any thought? I trust you. You're not normally controversial, except perhaps when Philadelphia is represented at some sporting event... BusterD (talk) 01:54, 14 May 2026 (UTC)
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
