User talk:Enos733

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

• Be Bold!
• Don't let grumpy users scare you off.
• Meet other new users
• Learn from others
• Play nicely with others
• Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
• Tell us about you

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here! TheThingy ^Talk 00:13, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Organized Labour September Editing Event

You're invited to join the Organized Labour community editing event, a cross-wiki event taking place throughout September 2026!

The campaign brings together Wikimedians interested in improving coverage of organised labour, workers, trade unions, and labour history. We have confirmed collaborations with Wikipedia language editions in English, Dutch, Persian, Serbo-Croatian and French. If you want to add other language editions or other wiki projects you are strongly encouraged to do so! This event spans geography and languages!

This is a one-time invitation. You're receiving it because you previously signed a petition related to Wiki Workers United (WWU). We hope you'll join us!

Regards ~ Shushugah (talk) 14:19, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hi Enos733, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

• Add Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers to your watchlist to follow NPP-related discussions
• If you use Twinkle, configure it to log your CSDs and PRODs
• If you can read any languages other than English, add yourself to the list of reviewers with language proficiencies

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you're not alone! _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:32, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

@Rosguill thank you. - Enos733 (talk) 15:39, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

bad idea, this guy just lost a decision on an AFD vote and now after creating a discussion with a consensus with another yes voter on the lost afd, he is editing Wikipedia:Notability (People) to change the requirements for local politicians so they can get the page restored. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Caroline_Torosis @Rosguill ~2026-48037-02 (talk) 17:19, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

For clarity, I suggested the article in question should be deleted (WP:Articles for deletion/Caroline Torosis). - Enos733 (talk) 17:33, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

Okay,I will accept that mistake but can you tell me the rationale to take it upon yourself to change the Wikipedia:Notabilitypage without some sort of vote that or discussion that directly benefits the person who just lost the AFD vote you just participated in? Especially to soften the criteria. After 25 years of discussion you just decided to take it upon yourself to change the language for notability in regards to local politicians after just becoming a new page patroller? No real discussion with any admins, no real discussion of substantial editors with no affiliation to the subject, lets just make it easier for the person who just lost the vote? I admit the mistake but your actions, however innocent, provoked a standard response of suspicion. I do apologize and would love to hear your reasoning! ~2026-48037-02 (talk) 17:45, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

NPOL change

I edited WP:NPOL to raise the expectations for local elected officials and candidates to get a stand-alone page, to be close to the expectations set in WP:CORPDEPTH. I generally believe that the change also reflects current consensus at AfD - that local officials should need substantive coverage of their legacy and actions, not just coverage of the votes they take, the ribbons they cut, or statements they make. The previous language was very vague about the standard Just being an elected local official, an official in a state/province-wide political party, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline. This is a loose standard. - Enos733 (talk) 18:40, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

@4meter4, I would like to know what you would proposed to change NPOL? Enos733 (talk) 03:31, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Narendra Chawla

Hi there. Would you mind reverting your non admin closure at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Narendra Chawla? I don’t believe many admin closers would consider a discussion with a substantive nomination and only two keep !votes a sufficient quorum for a keep. With either a second relist or N/C close in play, this should have been left for an admin to determine. Thanks. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:12, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

@Dclemens1971, Done. In general, I think that two keep comments asserting the subject met GNG and no other comments is sufficient to keep an article, even as a NAC. I personally don't think an N/C close would have been appropriate as I think the reason for deletion was substantive, but not so strong to be determinative in the face of other editors pushing back. Specifically, you wrote the coverage was routine, but that was refuted by an editor showing that the coverage spanned a number of years. In weighing those comments, keep was much stronger on policy and I did not think a relist would attract many more good participants in the discussion. - Enos733 (talk) 20:31, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

I appreciate you reversing the closure. In my years at AfD, I have almost never seen a delete nomination with two keeps and no other !votes closed as "keep" (unless the deletion proposal is not based on policies and guidelines). When a deletion nomination is rooted in P&Gs, it generally takes a quorum of three !votes to demonstrate a "keep" consensus. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:37, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

I don't think I've run across someone articulating a lack of quorum when more editors suggest it should be kept - usually, I see it the other direction, two editors arguing to delete the article could lead to a soft delete closure. In any event, we will see how other editors respond, as it was redirected. - Enos733 (talk) 03:57, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

New cross-language page link: George Rauscher

A new page 조지 라우셔 on the Korean Wikipedia has been linked to the page George Rauscher, which you created, via Wikidata (Q70542792).

You will not be notified about future links to pages you created. To opt in to these notifications, follow the opt-in instructions.

NervousBot (talk) 04:58, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Jonathan Abrams (writer)

Hello Enos733. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Jonathan Abrams (writer), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Reverse copyvio - copied from Wikipedia without attribution - see article talk. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 21:46, 3 November 2026 (UTC)