User talk:Dorades

On this page, old discussions are archived. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at 2026/02.

Your Nominations

Hello @Dorades.

You have been nominating many entries for deletion, under the reason of "Not notable.", without any further explanation. What is your process for coming to the conclusion that an entry is not notable and requires deletion, and why do you consistently fail to provide any support or explanations to your claims? ~2025-40079-51 (talk) 20:14, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

I am not going to discuss with someone hiding behind a temporary account. You are not welcome on this talk page unless you disclose who you are. --Dorades (talk) 20:23, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Outcome (for the record): User posted here again, gaving away by other contributions (cf. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/~2025-40067-57, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/~2025-40079-51) that they are identical with User:Archer470 who got blocked and all of their contributions deleted. --Dorades (talk) 12:14, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Food for thought. Since some user report that there are some nodes in OpenStreetMap that have been removed, I notify the OSM Community (The user deleted their comments, but it leaves traces, and perhaps you could figure out what happened). The rest is for you to read. —Yamato Shiya^{大和 士也} (Talk • Contribs) 16:59, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, I just read that thread and can imagine what they wrote there. I never engaged with the OSM community myself but I think in this case it was a good idea to tell them what happened here. Regards, --Dorades (talk) 20:49, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

How to patrol on items?

Hi, thank you again for resolving the Kagwe case. I often saw you "patrolling": asking for bulk deletion of items, and identifying potential self-promotion items in bulk. My question is, how do you do that? Like, you seem easily identify problematic items and just present them in the RfD page. I usually just watch from Recent Changes, but what I got is usually random mistakes. —Yamato Shiya^{大和 士也} (Talk • Contribs) 16:54, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi, in the specific case above of Kagwe and related entities, I followed a comment from User:Peter James who already identified said user's contributions as promotional (cf. Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2025/12/14#c-Peter_James-20251202214000-Archer470-20251127235200). When I nominate such an item, I always check inlinks and in case there are any and these also don't seem notable, I nominate them altogether. Usually, I also check the other contributions of users who created items that don't seem notable; normally, I restrict this to not already established users. I don't want to get too much in detail here, but obviously there are certain professional areas where people think it might be helpful for their business/project/career etc. to have it listed here and thus there are also some entities which attract such people. But all of these are not from systematic patrolling but from digging and finding. --Dorades (talk) 21:03, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Ah, alright thank you for the explanation!—Yamato Shiya^{大和 士也} (Talk • Contribs) 22:43, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Second opinion

Hi, sorry to bother you again, I need a second opinion on this matter. I saw promotion pattern, but a bit unsure.

I suspect they are promotional items, since they are created by new user, focusing on this particular company only, and when I check for the notability, at least one ID is not valid. But the presence seems legit. Whats your opinion? Thanks. —Yamato Shiya^{大和 士也} (Talk • Contribs) 05:45, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi, no worries, but apparently I'm answering too late since all of these are already deleted. It seems you were right that these were promotional and definitely not notable. :) Regards, --Dorades (talk) 14:35, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

No problem. It seems that I need more "confidence". —Yamato Shiya^{大和 士也} (Talk • Contribs) 15:11, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Request for help in reviewing contributions by David Osipov

Hi, recently I took notice of items that are related to a user. They added a various items, I believe much of them is notable, but could not verify due to language barrier. But they also added items that indicate self promotion and conflict of interest. Several of them are, along with RFD:

• Q137738502 - RFD
• David Zurabovich Osipov (Q130604188) - RFD 1, RFD 2
• Study of the Knowledge Management Tools in Russian Enterprises (Q130631971) - RFD
• Georgiy Pavlovich Osipov (Q130516824) - RFD 1, RFD 2

All of the aforementioned item are created by the same user, and indicate personal interest in them. Thanks. ^{Happy New Year 2026!}Yamato Shiya^{大和 士也} (Talk • Contribs) 10:35, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I took a look at the items:

• Q137738502 doesn't seem notable in its current state;
• David Zurabovich Osipov (Q130604188) doesn't seem notable on its own, but the Commons category would have to be deleted, too; also depends on the other items;
• Study of the Knowledge Management Tools in Russian Enterprises (Q130631971): the notability of theses are assessed with different outcomes, while some people think that these are not notable, others add those extensively in own WikiProjects;
• Georgiy Pavlovich Osipov (Q130516824) could be notable, but I can't read Russian, so not sure about that one.

Since all of these are already nominated for deletion, I am not sure if this helps in any way. --Dorades (talk) 15:08, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Perhaps you could add your comment and vote to the RfD? ^{Happy New Year 2026!}Yamato Shiya^{大和 士也} (Talk • Contribs) 15:31, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation, but I don't think I have to add anything. Note that comments on RfD are usually not seen as votes but as comments on notability and I don't have any useful input at the moment. --Dorades (talk) 15:42, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Question regarding deletion of item Q137828813

Hello, I hope you don’t mind me contacting you directly, and I apologize in advance if this is not the correct place to ask. I am a completely new contributor on Wikidata, and these were my very first contributions. I am still struggling to understand the rules and procedures, and I clearly made mistakes despite trying to follow the guidelines as best as I could. I would like to clarify explicitly that I have **no personal or professional connection** to Fabian Flécheux. My edits were not intended as self-promotion or advocacy, but as a good-faith (and likely clumsy) attempt to document an author based on sources I believed were acceptable. I was confused by the deletion because the related work item:

• Condamné (Q137829449)

was created and accepted on Wikidata, supported by:

• an ISBN and legal deposit at the Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF),
• independent media coverage (Radio France, local press).

This led me to believe — possibly incorrectly — that the author item could also be acceptable if properly sourced. I fully understand now that I may have misunderstood Wikidata’s notability or recreation rules, and I sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused. If possible, I would be very grateful for any guidance on:

• why the recreation was not acceptable in this case, and
• how a newcomer like me should proceed correctly in the future.

If this message is misplaced, please feel free to ignore it, and I apologize again for the intrusion. Thank you very much for your time. Best regards, Laura

Hello User:LauraNintot, thanks for reaching out. You write that the item Condamné (Q137829449) was accepted on Wikidata. I think you are mistaken here, your creation of this item does not mean that it is formally accepted on Wikidata. There is no such process and no one has expressed that this item is indeed notable, as far as I can see. By the way, did you have a chance to read WD:N? Your first item on Fabian Flécheux was deleted because it did not meet these notability criteria. The second item was deleted because it is not acceptable to create already deleted entities again. If you want to request undeletion, you have to follow this guide: Wikidata:Guide to requests for undeletion. Also, I personally but other editors, too, don't like to answer AI written messages like your's above. Regards, --Dorades (talk) 22:40, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello Dorades,

Thank you very much for taking the time to reply and for your clear explanations.

I would like to clarify one point regarding my previous message: I used an AI tool to help me write in English, simply because I am not a native speaker and I do not fully understand the language well enough to express myself accurately. It was not intended to be misleading or impersonal in any way, just a practical necessity for communication.

I understand now that the creation of the item “Condamné” does not imply any formal acceptance or confirmation of notability on Wikidata, and thank you for pointing that out.

Regarding Fabian Flécheux:

– I understand that the first item did not meet the notability criteria.

– For the second attempt, I believed (perhaps incorrectly) that additional sources could make it acceptable, but I now understand that recreating an already deleted item is not allowed, regardless of new elements.

Thank you for explaining this distinction clearly.

I appreciate your guidance and I will carefully read WD:N as well as the guide you linked regarding requests for undeletion, before taking any further action.

Thanks again for your time and help.

Best regards,

Laura LauraNintot (talk) 22:49, 20 January 2026 (UTC)