User Talk: Gommeh

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

{{User:Gommeh/Header}}{{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo = old(7d)
| archive = User talk:Gommeh/Archives/%(year)d/%(monthname)s
| archiveheader = {{Talkarchive}}
{{Monthly archive list|startyear=2015|monthformat=name|root=User talk:Gommeh/Archives}}
}}
{{Monthly archive list|startyear=2015|monthformat=name|root=User talk:Gommeh/Archives}}
{{user talk criticism|usepagename=yes|otherusers=yes}}

Disambiguation link notification for July 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Blade (Honkai: Star Rail) ↗, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Immortal ↗ was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Help with Spanish

Hi Gommeh! Hope you are doing well. I saw your name at WP:EMB ↗, and was wondering if you could help this mentee question? Thanks in advance :) House '''Blaster''' ↗ (talk • he/they) 13:50, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

:Sent him a message giving him advice on what to do, and also letting him know he needs to speak English here. Told him if he has any questions he can send me a message here. Thanks for reaching out! Gommeh (talk 🎮 ↗ sign) 14:16, 8 July 2026 (UTC)
::Thank you so much; I really appreciate your help :) House '''Blaster''' ↗ (talk • he/they) 14:19, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

WP:GARC ↗: Invitation to review Dalek ↗

<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">90px|alt=|link= ↗</div>
Hello, you have been paired at good article review circles ↗ to review Dalek ↗. At the same time, another user will be reviewing the article you nominated. '''Please wait 24 hours''' or until all users have accepted their nomination before starting your review in case a user in your circle decides to decline their invite.

'''To accept or decline this invitation to review the article, visit WT:GARC#101 ↗.'''

'''A.Cython(talk)''' 01:06, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Tingyun ↗ is under review

Your good article nomination ↗ of the article Tingyun ↗ is 20px|alt=|link= ↗ '''under review'''. See '''Talk:Tingyun/GA1{{!}}the review page ↗''' for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have.  Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of A.Cython -- A.Cython (talk) 03:08, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

Confused?

Hey, I hope you are having a lovely week. I wanted to please ask why :Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Negative Zone ↗ was closed as redirect considering that most of the votes were keep or merge? I known that it is not the quantity of votes, but given that there were only 1 vote for redirect, I am quite confused. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 19:20, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

:Whoops, must have been a slip of my finger! I'll undo - thanks for pointing that out, as I did not catch that. In solidarity ↗, Gommeh (talk 🎮 ↗ sign) 19:32, 9 July 2026 (UTC)
::I had meant to close that as merge haha. Anyhow, fixed. In solidarity ↗, Gommeh (talk 🎮 ↗ sign) 19:34, 9 July 2026 (UTC)
:::Thank you and no worries! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 19:50, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

I am so surprised

There is not a single source shared for AFD Trump Towers Istanbul ↗ why it's marked as Keep. Can you please explain? Lordofhunter (talk) 06:21, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

:A simple Google search reveals plenty of usable sources. All you need to do is put them in the article. As much as I believe MediaKyle should have put the links in there for others to see, the onus is on the nominator (you) to check before submitting as part of WP:BEFORE ↗. In solidarity ↗, Gommeh (talk 🎮 ↗ sign) 11:27, 10 July 2026 (UTC)
::For instance, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/08/world/middleeast/in-istanbul-surprise-that-trump-towers-complex-is-linked-to-trump.html ↗ https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/donald-trump-s-longtime-business-connections-turkey-back-spotlight-n1064011 ↗ https://www.wsj.com/articles/erdogan-wants-istanbul-towers-to-lose-trump-name-1466855822 ↗ https://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/trump-overseas-security-231948 ↗. In solidarity ↗, Gommeh (talk 🎮 ↗ sign) 11:31, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Template:User Good articles topicon

Template:User Good articles topicon ↗ is generating bogus file option lint errors. On your own User:Gommeh, it's generating a bogus file option ↗ "Main_Page has brought 34 articles to good article status." Keep trying! —Anomalocaris (talk) 18:52, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

:Thanks for letting me know. <s>How do I fix this?</s> Fixed. In solidarity ↗, Gommeh (talk 🎮 ↗ sign) 18:55, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Right to exist (3rd nomination) ↗

I have to wonder if you saw my !vote there. It was closed as keep without mentioning why mine was disregarded - which may have been proper before merges were discussed at AfD but no longer is.

This is especially problematic because most of the keep !votes were WP:ITSNOTABLE ↗ rather than citing any policy/evidence. In other words, a pile-on. The nom rightly asked for such evidence and was ignored. So, even if I did not !vote at all, I think it still merited a relist purely for that reason. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:06, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

:You're more than welcome to request a deletion review if you disagree with my closure. But I think the consensus was clear enough. The examplecruft you mentioned can be dealt with without deletion. In other words, the article may need cleanup to address some of your concerns, but I think the consensus (some of which were WP:ITSNOTABLE ↗ but some were, in my eyes, clearly not) was obvious that deletion was not the right thing to do; otherwise, I think more people would have already !voted to merge. In solidarity ↗, Gommeh (talk 🎮 ↗ sign) 21:15, 10 July 2026 (UTC)
::I think it would be quite easy and do no harm to anybody if you withdrew the close and relisted it or allowed it to be relisted. My main question is why exactly you are so adamant on leaving it closed even despite the concerns I raised. Surely, if what I said was bunkum, it would eventually close the same way in a week or two.
::Why I would even be forced to do a deletion review is the real question. This isn't something that was scrutinized, studied and litigated over for hours to come to a conclusion and you'd lose massive amounts of effort if reversed, just a simple keep closure. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:17, 10 July 2026 (UTC)
:::You can relist it too, that would be fine by me. For all I know I could have made a mistake - we're only human! But I stand by my decision and my above statement. In solidarity ↗, Gommeh (talk 🎮 ↗ sign) 22:30, 10 July 2026 (UTC)