User talk:Girth Summit/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

New page reviewer granted

Hi Girth Summit. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Minor user rights can now be accorded on a time limited or probationary period, so do check back at WP:PERM/NPR in case this concerns your application. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encylopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

  • Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance. so that they are aware.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
  • If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. ~Swarm~ {talk} 02:11, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Congrats! This is well earned. Please feel free to run questions by me on my talk page (or to otherwise ping me) or at WT:NPP/R. As I mentioned at the start, NPP school is a lot less defined than CVUA so I would love your feedback. What worked well? What would you change? I will hopefully be able to help others in the future and would like to improve my curriculum. Best wishes, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:54, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
​ Thanks again for all the advice, support and above all responsiveness throughout the process Barkeep49 - you must have put a huge amount of time into the process, so I'll try to make sure I repay your investment by doing a good job! I intend to start out reviewing fairly straightforward cases to built=d up some experience before tackling trickier articles, but I will be sure to reach out for help or advice if I need it.
In terms of feedback, I'd start out by saying that I found the course incredibly useful - I have no doubt that being guided through a process by an experienced coach is both easier and more enjoyable than reading a load of policy/guideline pages and figuring out for yourself what to do, and it reduces the risk of disruption that might be caused by the error part of 'trial and error' (we're working on live articles written by real people, after all). That said, I recognise that bland 'everything was great' feedback isn't particularly helpful though when you're trying to improve your curriculum, so I'll take a couple of days to think about this and will try to get some thoughts back to you at the weekend. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 07:18, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

How do i become a page reviewer SantaCandy (talk) 14:33, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi SantaCandy - if you go to WP:NPP, there are guidelines talking you through the process of new page review. There's a lot to take in - personally, I went through the NPP School - information about that is available if you follow the link, including trainers who can help you out. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 14:39, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17

Hello Girth Summit,

News
Discussions of interest
  • Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
  • {{db-blankdraft}} was merged into G13 (Discussion)
  • A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
  • There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.
Reminders
  • NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.
NPP Tools Report
  • Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
  • copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
  • The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

John Boyne

Well, it is about me and I would be happy to provide ID if you need it. I just don't see what gives someone the right to post personal and private information on a site like this, particularly if the subject doesn't want it. It's disrespectful. At the very least, can you change 'self-identifies as' to 'is'. I don't "self-identify" as gay. I simply AM gay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DublinD16 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi DublinD16 - there's a couple of points worth discussing here. The first one is WP:COI - you can read the guidelines for yourself, but there are steps you have to take when editing about yourself, or anything you have a direct relationship with.
Regarding the content itself, I would have no problem with changing the wording of the assertion. 'Self-identifies' is indeed an awkward phrase - I've changed that, and expanded slightly based on the content of one of the articles. I hope that's less concerning?
Regarding what gives other people the right to write about you - they can only do it based on sources which are reliable, and in the public domain. Wikipedia needs to be verifiable, but it is also not censored. We don't write articles according to the wishes of the subjects, but we can only write material based on verifiable, reliable sources. I hope that makes sense? Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 19:02, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
@DublinD16:: Hi there. You might be interested in reading about how we suggest dealing with articles about yourself. Additionally, I recommend you confidentially contact experienced and trusted volunteers with the information that verifies your identity. I don't see an email listed on your website but if you have an email like john@johnboyne.com in many cases that would suffice or a volunteer can help you verify you identity in another way - no need to scan an official ID which can cause its own problems. I am one such volunteer and if you tell me you've emailed us I can work with you there further. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:07, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Page review

Hi Girth,

thank you for your review on my article Q&T S.p.A, even if it has not been accepted. I am new to Wikipedia and I would love to have some advises to improve my effort into this.

Bests,

Sara — Preceding unsigned comment added by S.russo.92 (talk • contribs) 15:20, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Sara, thanks for reaching out. A good start would be to read the notability guideline I mentioned in my declining comments - WP:NCORP, paying particular attention to WP:CORPDEPTH which discusses sourcing. Your article had two sources - one of them was an interview with the CEO of the company, the other was basically a press release. We can't rely on the CEO's words when describing the company - that's not independent; similarly, we can't rely on press releases. What we would be looking for would be in-depth analysis by an independent, reliable source. I hope that's helpful - I'd be happy to look at other sources you might be able to dig up. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 17:56, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Collaborative Fusion

You made a mistake, collaborative fusion is not the page Juvare.

Please don't make edits or undo my edits that you do not have knowledge in. <unsigned edit by Chasezhang2.0>

@Chasezhang2.0: How about you start leaving some edit summaries when you make substantial (or indeed any) changes to articles? If you remove large chunks of text, or templates like infoboxes, without explaining what you are doing, your edits are very likely to be reverted as possible vandalism. If you are being reverted by editors as experienced as Oshwah and Money emoji, you're probably doing something wrong - please try to learn from that, and start explaining what you're doing. It also helps make collaboration easier if you sign your talk page comments (there's a button at the bottom of the editing window). Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 15:34, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

@girth summit - I already spoke to them, I understand the need to explain why I made edits and will make sure I do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chasezhang2.0 (talk • contribs) 15:39, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

FR30799386's User Scripts

Dear all. Recently, FR30799386 (talk) was blocked for sock puppetry. Among their projects were a number of user scripts that they left behind. I (DannyS712) have copied the scripts, and have taken over maintaining them. You currently import one or more of FR30799386's scripts, and I thought that you might want to import a maintained version. Links to each script are provided below.

If you have any questions, please reach out and talk to me. --DannyS712 (talk) 03:57, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ralph Northam

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ralph Northam. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

A page you started (Tugnet Ice House) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Tugnet Ice House.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

A notable and well-written article, nice work! I've fixed a few disambiguation links on the article (I enabled a gadget that highlights all dab links in orange, so that makes spotting such links easier) but nothing major. I'm not sure if you know about the Did you know process, but I think the fact that this is the largest standing ice house in the UK is interesting enough for it to be a potential candidate. I can help you out with nominating it if you would like it or even just nominate it myself.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|SkyGazer 512}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

SkyGazer 512 My talk page 23:26, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi ​, thanks for reviewing it - a DYK, that would be exciting! I've never been through the process before, so would be very pleased if you'd explain what I need to do (or indeed if you'd like to nominate it yourself). Thanks for the offer and suggestion.
BTW, what's the gadget you use to check the links? Sounds useful. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 23:38, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
I'd be happy to explain. The primary purpose of the Did you know section of the main page is to feature new articles that have a fact that is hooky. For the purposes of DYK, "New" refers to any article that has been created, 5x expanded by prose size, moved to mainspace, or improved to good article status within the last seven days. The article also must meet other criteria, such as being longer than 1,500 prose size and not a stub, decently sourced, and neutral. The hook must be interesting, concise (shorter than 200 characters), supported by a source, and mentioned in the article. There are a few other minor criteria as well. WP:DYK explains this in a whole lot more detail so it would probably be worth reading through. Now, to actually nominate an article, go to the Instructions for nominators section of Template talk:Did you know and read the instructions there. Once nominated, someone will eventually approve the hook/article or ask for issues to be addressed; once it is approved, the hook will be promoted to one of six preparation areas (unless the promoter finds issues that the reviewer did not spot), then to the queue, and finally to the main page, but you don't need to worry about the preps and queues. I'd be absolutely willing to help you out if you have any more questions or like I said, I could nominate it myself if you think it would be easier.
Go to the Gadgets section of your preferences. Scroll to the Appearance section and then check "Display links to disambiguation pages in orange" which is the fifth option from the bottom. Click save and you should see that links to disambiguation pages now appear in orange rather than blue. It is definitely a handy gadget; I've found it helpful so much. I hope this helps! Cheers, --SkyGazer 512 My talk page 00:53, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Girth Summit I would encourage you to dive in yourself to DYK rather than take SkyGazer up on his nice offer. I've had mixed experiences there but most editors have a good experience and getting your stuff on the main page is fun. Just make sure to read the rules and the Wikipedia:Did you know/Supplementary guidelines and you should be OK. As a first timer you don't need to review anyone elses articles (first 5 times are actually "free") so that removes a substantial layer of complexity. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:01, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
​ ​ Thanks both - I'll have a crack at it. I've had a quick think about some possible hooks - I'd be grateful if you'd let me know which of these you think is 'hookiest'?
I'll try the orange link thing - certainly sounds like it would be useful when writing articles - I try to check links manually as I go along, but when the link is blue I seem to forget sometimes that it's going where I want it to... GirthSummit (blether) 07:48, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
All of those look interesting to me. I think the first one is the hookiest, but I would suggest somehow linking to Ice house (building) as not all readers would know what that is. Maybe the following:
Just an idea. Do bear in mind that you can enter multiple hooks, so you could provide several options and see what the reviewer/promoter thinks is best. One comment about the first one; DYK reviewers are often strict about having all hook material cited in the article, so you probably should specify that the Tugnet Ice House in particular is now a dolphin watching centre in the article; you already say that it was acquired by the Scottish Dolphin Centre, which means that it is owned by the charity but not necessarily that guests can watch dolphins in that particular building. Cheers, --SkyGazer 512 My talk page 13:44, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Ah, OK - yes, I'll make that clearer in the article itself, then put them forward. Thanks again for suggesting this - I'm pretty new to the content creation game, it's really encouraging to get positive feedback like this, and it's always interesting to find out about a new area of Wikipedia. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 13:52, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
No problem, I've definitely found it interesting to explore new areas.--SkyGazer 512 My talk page 14:09, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi SkyGazer 512, it looks like my nomination has been passed. If I've read the instructions correctly, there's nothing more for me to do - is that correct? Just wanted to make sure I haven't missed anything. Thanks GirthSummit (blether) 12:53, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Girth Summit That's correct. A sysop will likely take a second look at things before placing you in the queue so know you might have some more tweaks to make at that point. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 13:08, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Yes, Barkeep is correct that you don't have to do anything unless the promoter finds more issues that need to be addressed. To be a bit pedantic, it doesn't have to be an admin who promotes initially; any user (but usually one experienced with the DYK process) will add the hook to a preparation area unless there are more issues, and once the preparation area is filled with hooks an admin will move it to the queue, where a bot will add it to the main page at the appropriate time. But again, you don't have to worry about that part. :-)--SkyGazer 512 My talk page 13:54, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Cool. Thanks again both for the tips on this - I'll think about this next time I find a 'fun fact' when I'm writing an article. Just about to hit go on another one - a neoclassical church in Moray, if you like that sort of thing... Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 13:57, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Counter Vandalism Training

Hiya, I noticed you have a student spot open for CVU training - I've started working with Twinkle and have had some success, but I reckon I could do with some proper training, specifically in correctly applying the right templates. I'd love to learn more if you have the time, so please let me know!  vwilding  talk 21:31, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi vwilding, nice to meet you. I'd be very happy to take you through the training course. I'm out and about just now, but I'll set up a training page tomorrow morning and ping you from there. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 22:08, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, I'm looking forward to it!  vwilding  talk 23:02, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Hopefully you received the ping from your training page - ready to begin when you are. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 14:16, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Detransition

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Detransition. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Possible case of COI

Hi Girth Summit, I need your help as I'm not sure about what to do in this situation. I noticed a user called Mark Franchetti editing at the article Mark Franchetti and consequently warned them using uw-coi template. What am I supposed to do now? Is it sufficient to report them to WP:UAA or there is a better venue where reporting this case? Horst Hof (talk) 15:40, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Horst Hof, good to hear from you. The approach would differ depending on whether or not this really is the person in question. It it's not him, then a report to UAA would see the account blocked per WP:IMPERSONATE; however, he's not so famous that impersonation seems likely, and I expect that it probably is really him. I'm going to ping @Barkeep49: for advice here, as he works in the volunteer team that responds to cases like this. I see that the COI edits were reverted, but he is adding unsourced material about himself back to the article now, which isn't great. GirthSummit (blether) 15:50, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Oh OK, thanks a lot and let's see what Barkeep49 will comment. Cheers, Horst Hof (talk) 15:55, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Horst Hof I messed up my ping of you before. See message below. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:06, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Girth Summit & Horst Hof this should definitely go to UAA and I have gone ahead and done so. What will happen now is he'll get a block but also instructions about how to verify his identity. Assuming he does this we can then work to educate on how to proceed. I noticed he had a draft rejected which suggests good intent to follow procedures. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:05, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
​​Thank you both for your comments. I will keep these tips in mind for future cases. Horst Hof (talk) 07:23, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:The NeuroGenderings Network

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:The NeuroGenderings Network. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Black and white

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Black and white. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Lil snupe

Hi Girth, from time to time I come back here to ask your help. My question of today is about the article above. An anon user created an article about that american rapper replacing the previous redirect. At a first glance the article seems acceptable but the problem is that they created it at Lil snupe (with the second name first letter lowecase). A redirect article Lil Snupe already exists. I think the correct situation would be to have the article under the second title but I'm not sure about how to proceed. Should I simply move the content from the first to the second or should I ask an administrator to take care of that? Is there an appropriate venue to leave a request about that? Thanks a lot in advance. Horst Hof (talk) 06:35, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Horst Hof - you're always welcome here. The new article was entirely unsourced, and it was pretty puffy - however, it also contained an assertion that a named individual committed murder - without a source, that's not cool! I did a quick check for sources, and it appears the named individual was not actually convicted, so I've reinstated the redirect and asked on IRC for revdel - something like that needs taking down quickly. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 06:58, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Oh! I only read the inception and didn't get how the situation actually was. I feel I still have to improve my skills very much, I'm still not able to quickly understand when I stumble upon complicated situations. Thanks again. Cheers. Horst Hof (talk) 07:06, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Don't blame yourself - it's something you'll develop an eye for I'm sure. An article without any references at all really jumps out at me and I always look at it closely. Just remember that any unsourced allegation of criminality of a named person needs to be quickly dealt with - even if you suspect the statement is correct, it either needs to be reliably sourced, or reverted and removed from the viewable history. GirthSummit (blether) 08:14, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Tugnet Ice House

Hello! Your submission of Tugnet Ice House at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:09, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Mobile country code

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Mobile country code. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Kashmir Observer

KASHMIR OBSERVER

Kashmir Observer is one of the first English-language daily newspapers published in Srinagar in Kashmir, a state of India.

The daily began its publication in March 1997 when the local population, caught up in a bloody conflict and hungry for news, was dependent on newspapers coming from New Delhi.

Kashmir Observer is among the very few newspapers believed to have retained credibility despite heavy odds facing media in conflict-ridden Kashmir.

Kashmir Observer Online is the global face of the daily Kashmir Observer on the internet. Kashmir Observer Online is a major source of news and information for vast Kashmiri diaspora, intending tourists, business leaders, diplomats, journalists and those interested in India-Pakistan affairs.[1]

In 2012, the Kashmir Observer began publishing the Bazar Observer, Kashmir's first business newspaper.[2]

Kashmir Observer is the only newspaper in J&K which publishes regular supplements catering to different segments of society. Some of them are:

Bazar Observer for business community

Young Kashmir for teenagers and young adults.

Khyen Chyen (Food & Drink journal)

Mizraab (For Kashmir University students)

Samanabal (For the students of Science & Technology University (IUST)

Sajjad Haider is the publisher and editor-in-chief of the Kashmir Observer.

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Kashmir_Observer.htm

REFERENCE LINKS

https://scroll.in/author/12581
https://www.exchange4media.com/industry-briefing-news/kashmir-observer-to-launch-business-supplement-47494.html
https://rsf.org/en/news/discriminatory-use-official-advertising-kashmir
https://indianexpress.com/article/india/kashmir-newspapers-publish-blank-front-pages-to-protest-govts-decision-to-stop-ads-to-two-dailies-5619019/
https://cpj.org/tags/kashmir-observer
https://www.newslaundry.com/2016/07/11/kashmirunrest-the-difference-in-what-delhi-and-kashmiri-media-saw
https://www.newslaundry.com/2018/06/19/kashmir-woke-up-to-blank-editorials-in-newspapers-today-in-memory-of-shujaatbukhari

EXTERNAL LINKS

https://kashmirobserver.net/
https://khyenchyen.net/

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.122.141.19 (talk) 09:21, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi IP user and User:CiaPan - can you help me out and explain what this is about - why have you put a load of stuff about the Kashmiri Observer on my talk page? Is this a draft you want me to look over? GirthSummit (blether) 16:58, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

I am afraid I can not explain this wall of text. I have no idea about its purpose, just added some formatting to improve readability and supplied the IP author's signature. --CiaPan (talk) 19:23, 6 April 2019 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
It looks like a poorly directed advocacy by Special:Contributions/Sufi519 for accepting the Draft:Kashmir Observer. --CiaPan (talk) 14:30, 8 April 2019 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

DYK for Tugnet Ice House

On 10 April 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tugnet Ice House, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Tugnet Ice House, the largest surviving ice house in the UK, is now a dolphin watching centre? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tugnet Ice House. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Tugnet Ice House), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Congrats Girth! Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 00:12, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Barkeep49, and SkyGazer 512 for suggesting this in the first place. I'll keep it in mind if I come across any interesting nuggets in future when I'm writing an article. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 08:31, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
No problem, adding on to the congrats for your first DYK!--SkyGazer 512 My talk page 13:47, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:35 mm film

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:35 mm film. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi there!

I believe you were the first Wikipedian to welcome me. I just want to say thank you, along with the cookies! I'm having a really great time on Wikipedia. Thank you!

AzCoy7 (Talk) 03:38, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rocket Lab

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rocket Lab. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

A question

Hi there,

I just wanted to ask, if someone performs a vandalism act, and you spot it, even though you're not an admin or anything, and no-one else spots it, do I just erase the edit and notify an administrator or someone or do I leave it alone and notify an administrator? Also, for the humourous-purpose thing (something about whacking with a wet trout or whale or etc), if someone performs major vandalism, am I allowed to post that on the vandal's user page / talk page? This is what I mean: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Whacking_with_a_wet_trout

If I'm allowed to whack if someone performs vandalism, I'd be happy. :-)


This user is a member of the
Counter-Vandalism Unit.

Thanks!

AzCoy7 (talk) 23:30, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi AzCoy7 - a trout is normally used as a jokey way to tell an editor in good standing that they did something silly. Vandalism is different, and is treated in a different manner. You don't need to be an administrator to deal with it, although only an admin can finally block an account if they don't stop. If anti-vandalism is work that you are particularly interested in, you should check out WP:CVUA (where I am a tutor) - although before you do that, you might want to go through either the Tutorial or The_Wikipedia_Adventure to learn the ropes about editing. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 08:57, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Ref template

hi – the instructions for {{Historic Environment Scotland}} are given on its documentation page. The notes also give links to the equivalent templates for sites in England and Wales. EdwardUK (talk) 09:46, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

​ Thanks - I'll be honest and admit that I didn't know ref templates were a thing. I'll do some reading around this. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 09:50, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

GERTRUDE Evelyn Freeman

Patricia.A.Freeman (talk) 15:53, 17 April 2019 (UTC)Hi there!

Thank-you so much for reaching out to me and letting me know my edits were improper--I'm absolutely appreciative of those of you who go aobut ensuring data is as accurate as possible. I don't know how to update as you've suggested, but am 100% positive her given name was GERTRUDE Evelyn Freeman after her mother; she never went by the name Gertrude, always Evelyn. I have a copy of three documents as evidence: 1) 1920 US Federal Census, Ohio Birth Index and the registry of her first marriage in Ohio. If you would, please guide me how to correct entry and I'll try to do my best to comply. Patricia.A.Freeman (talk) 15:53, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi there Patricia.A.Freeman. These appear to be primary sources - it looks like you have done some research into her background. This might not be something you were aware of, but original research is not actually permitted here. Our goal is to summarise what reliable, secondary sources say about our subject. If you can find a published biography, or a newspaper report, or similar, which gives Gertrude as her given name, then we could use that; entries in birth indices, marriage registries etc., however, would not be permissible. (The standard advice, when someone uncovers something new about a subject, is to go and get it published somewhere else, then we can use it!) Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 16:03, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rigel

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rigel. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

G5

Please use the sockmaster's username, not the page author's name when adding G5 tags. Then the notice links to the SPI, the suspected socks (if there were any in this case), and the confirmed socks, rather than telling you who the author was, which you know anyway. The message in your CSD log will also be more useful in future. Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 14:14, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Cabayi - sorry for the mess-up, I haven't done many G5s before, I'll remember that for next time. GirthSummit (blether) 14:17, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
No worries. It's all a mystery 'til you discover the useful tricks the software does with your input. Happy editing, Cabayi (talk) 14:19, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
​ Would it help for me to go back remove the original CSD tags, and retag them with the sockmaster's account? Happy to do that if it helps, but won't bother if you've already tidied up after me. GirthSummit (blether) 14:23, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Already done. The only place I didn't fix was your CSD log. It's useful to have the right sockmaster listed there so, if the article is recreated, and you see a blue-link in your log that ought to be red, you'll more quickly find the SPI case. Cabayi (talk) 14:26, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Ah, OK - I'll amend that manually then. Cheers.GirthSummit (blether) 14:29, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Cannabidiol

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Cannabidiol. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

A page you started (St Peter's Roman Catholic Church, Buckie) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating St Peter's Roman Catholic Church, Buckie.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Nice work!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Hughesdarren}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Hughesdarren (talk) 07:48, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Hughesdarren, thanks for reviewing the page and for your kind words. If you're interested, I also wrote Bellie Kirk a few weeks ago, but it hasn't been patrolled yet - I'd be very grateful if you had time to cast your eye over it. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 08:54, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

A page you started (Bellie Kirk) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Bellie Kirk.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Another great article, in this reference it says the church was built between 1795 and 1798 [1] whereas the article says 1787 to 1788. Do you have a ref that confirms the dates? Cheers and keep up the good work!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Hughesdarren}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Hughesdarren (talk) 09:04, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks again Hughesdarren! I'm not sure what happened with the dates there. I checked the Historic Environment Scotland website and the Pevsner book (probably the most authoritative sources) and they both agree on 1795-8, so if I found those other dates anywhere else they're probably wrong. Might have just been a typo - fixed now, thanks for spotting it. Cheers. GirthSummit (blether) 09:13, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Suttons Wharf RD1 request

The link you provided:

link

Returns a 404 for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sphilbrick (talk • contribs) 18:55, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

@Sphilbrick: Weird - I picked it up with Earwig, and copy/pasted the address directly from the tool. If I run Earwig now, that site is the first one it lists (although it comes back as 0% now that I removed the offending content). But if I try to go to the address in my browser, I get the same as you, a 404. Could Earwig be running off a cached page, or not showing the full address it's looking at or something?GirthSummit (blether) 19:17, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Girth Summit, reasonable questions, but I don't know enough about the internal workings of Earwig to answer. Do you know how to search the Internet archive? S Philbrick(Talk) 19:26, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Sphilbrick I don't, but I expect I can figure it out if you can point me at a link? I'm about to eat dinner, but will try to look into it ASAP. GirthSummit (blether) 19:35, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Girth Summit, Sometimes material that is no longer directly available has been archive in a place I like to refer to as the Wayback Machine but it is more formally the Internet archive
For example S Philbrick(Talk) 19:55, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Sphilbrick - you seem to have found it, thanks! That's the source alright - you'll see the text I removed was copied verbatim from there. Do you need me to amend the revdel request with that link? GirthSummit (blether) 20:24, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Girth Summit, Nope, I handled it. Thanks for reporting. S Philbrick(Talk) 20:27, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Lisdexamfetamine

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Lisdexamfetamine. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

help with verifying additional information on Wiki

Thank you for your comments about Cragend Farm trying to get listings on wiki. The building Cragend Silo is listed (see facebook page) and on Historic listed buildings Northumberland but we are trying to add photos that are uopto date and correct and even with National trust on our side we are not having much luck updating. We are not techi and this is a hard medium to work with. We have several areas we would like to add to and also photos and I really need more that an email of guidance more of a day of tutorial. I do not check this every day as we are a working farm. We have been given a grant by Country Houses Foundation recently to do some repair work to the listed building hence our interest in updating the wiki pages and adding to them. I hope you can help me many thanks iun advance Lou Renwick Cragend Farm. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lou Renwick (talk • contribs) 06:38, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Lou Renwick - funnily enough I was in Northumberland a couple of weeks ago for a holiday, and visited Cragside while I was there - I'm guessing you're nearby, I would have been interested to take a look at the site while I was there! Oh well...
I've written quite a few articles about listed buildings in Scotland - you can find a list of them on my userpage - so I have some experience in this area, and I'd be happy to help you write one. What we need first is reliable, independent sources. I found the Historic England site here - that's a good start, but as an absolute minimum we need two. I don't have the Pevsner guide for Northumberland (this book) - do you know whether the building is described in there, or in any other architectural guide books?
I'm afraid the Facebook page and your own website won't work, since they're not independent.
Once we've got an article to attach them to, I'll help you to upload some photographs - they need to be pictures that you own the copyright to, and you need to be willing to release the copyright for anyone to use.
Hope that all makes sense - let me know if you know of any suitable guidebooks, and I'll do a bit more digging to see if I can find any online sources that I think we could use. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 06:54, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi again Lou Renwick - I've done a bit more digging, and I re-read your post above. A few points...
  • I see that the silo is listed at the article [[2]], and that the picture isn't great. If you've got a better picture than that, there are two stages to swapping it. First, you need to upload the file and make the appropriate copyright declaration; then, we edit the article to use the new file. I already know how to do the second stage (editing the article to use a new file), but I've never been through the process of uploading a file - however, I've been meaning to learn how to do it, and this would be a good opportunity for me to do the reading and learn, so I'd be happy to help. Can you start by confirming that you have a better image, that you own the rights to (i.e. you took it yourself, or you paid a photographer to take it and they have given the rights to you)?
  • I found a number of additional sources mentioning the silo, including this, this, this, and a mention in this book. This is probably enough to write a short article with, although I'd feel more confident about demonstrating notability if we could find a description in Pevsner or another recent architectural guide.
  • Since you are the owner of the building, you have an obvious conflict of interest with regards to any articles about it. There are guidelines for how to deal with a COI at WP:COI, but briefly I'd suggest for now that you create a userpage with the text 'I am the owner of Cragend Farm and Cragend Silo, and acknowledge that I have a conflict of interest with regards to them.' That should do for the meantime until we get an article off the ground.
  • Finally, I don't mean to be rude or unwelcoming, but I just want to make sure that we understand each other clearly from the outset: I'll be more than happy to help write a neutral, factual encyclopedia article about the silo, but it will need to comply with all our guidelines, especially WP:NOTPROMO. If you're here because you think readers would be interested in learning more about this historic building, then we're good; if you want to get a page as part of the marketing strategy for your business however, I'm not interested. So long as we can agree on that now, I'm happy to proceed with starting a draft article. GirthSummit (blether) 08:54, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Cragend Silo and Weighbridge

Hello Thank you for your help so far. The National trust have said they are happy for the Silo and the weighbridge to be added to the Cragside listing as additional information about the estate and gave the historical document 2010 for r efernce, but they missed the w eighbridge in this report as it was covered in debris at the time and we have restored it. If you came to Cragside did you drive past us on the carriage drive or did you just stay in the house. Next time, please come and see us. We do not want this for marketing but becuase we have reecived a grant to repari part of the silo we thought it was time it had its own listing and link to Country Houses Foundation perhaps? It is still tricky for me to understand but if you bear with me and talk me through it slowly I think we may get there. regards Lou Lou Renwick (talk) 19:20, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Lou Renwick - Apologies to Girth Summit for the intrusion, but they appear to be the only editor you're responding to and we need to get a few things clear. The National Trust doesn't have any "ownership" of the Cragside article, and their happiness, or otherwise, with you adding material isn't relevant. What is relevant is whether the material is appropriate and verifiable. At the moment, there's no indication the material you're adding is either. As Girth Summit has said, if you want an article on Cragend Farm, and the farm is notable and you have reliable sources to show this, fine, go ahead and put a draft through Wikipedia:Articles for creation. But please don't keep adding material to Cragside, unless it's relevant and sourced. KJP1 (talk) 21:06, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
No problem KJP1 - what you say is correct, nothing should be added to any articles without appropriate published sourcing. In fairness to Lou though, he hasn't edited any articles for a few weeks, since the discussion at the tea house (unless I'm missing something?), so I don't think he's trying to force anything through and he's doing the right thing as a new user by reaching out for assistance. Lou, I'll read through your comments properly tomorrow and get back to you with how I think we can proceed. Cheers both, GirthSummit (blether) 21:18, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
You're missing nothing. It was me, who missed his latest addition to Cragside, some two weeks back. Real life's been busy. As I said on his Talkpage back in January, some of the material is interesting and may very well be suitable for inclusion but none of it is sourced. And for me, there's a lingering concern around the COI and possible promotion. But I'm probably just too much of an old cynic. I'd be pleased to help on a building article if that's the way forward - I shall check my Northumberland Pevsner this evening to see if anything's there. All the very best. KJP1 (talk) 21:32, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
My guess is that we're talking about this, Historic England. "HYDRAULIC SILO BUILDING 70 METRES EAST OF CRAGEND FARMHOUSE (Grade II*) (1153196)". National Heritage List for England. Retrieved 24 January 2019.. KJP1 (talk) 05:47, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
And this is why I have a concern re. COI and promotion, [3]. KJP1 (talk) 05:52, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi KJP1 - yes, that's the right building. If you look up a couple of posts, you'll see that I already found a number of online resources discussing it, and there's a snippet I found in Google books that may have more in it if I can get a copy of the book; basically, I think the silo is probably notable, and it's pretty interesting, so worthy of an article. If you've got the relevant Pevsner, I'd be eager to hear whether it's got anything in it.
I acknowledge the potential for COI, but I think we should commend Lou for engaging with other users - if you and I work on something together with input from Lou, I think we can manage to avoid any pitfalls and hopefully get a decent article out of it. (Having had a quick look at your userpage, and the array of Featured Article topicons, I'd be very happy to work with you!) GirthSummit (blether) 06:09, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
That's very kind. I took Cragside to FA in collaboration with another editor which is why I sometimes fall into the Own pit and get a bit territorial! You're absolutely right, as a Grade II* listed building, its Notability is unimpeachable and there's sufficient for an article from the research you've done. I'm not immediately seeing it in the Pevsner Cragside entry, although other agricultural/industrial buildings Armstrong put up are there, such as the Tumbleton Ram House, the Debdon Sawmill and the Burnfoot Power House. But I'll have another look as they can sometimes be recorded in another location. I'd be delighted to work on an article and a decent image would be great, although it looks a bit of a brute of a building! Talk to LR and get back to me for anything you want me to do. In the meantime, I'll give it a mention in Cragside. Best. KJP1 (talk) 06:29, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi Lou Renwick, KJP1 agrees that we have enough material to write an article about the silo, and it would make sense for context to mention the farm and potentially the weighbridge as well, if we can find the sources. You've said you want me to go slow with you, so I'll go through the steps I think we need to take, and I'll put action I'd like from you in bold.
  • Photographs The silo is already mentioned at Grade II* listed buildings in Northumberland, but the image is poor - it doesn't illustrate that particular building. If you have a photograph that you took yourself, or to which you own the copyright, you can upload it to Wikimedia Commons - that will allow us to use it in the list article immediately, and it will give us an image for the building when we write the article. If you have such a picture, please go to the following link: [4] and follow the instructions to upload the photograph. Drop me a note here to say that you've done it, with the filename, and I'll take a look at changing the list immediately. Do note that you will have to license the image for anyone to use it free of charge, but there are some options that allow you to require attribution when others use it - there are links on the page that explain all this if you're worried about it.
  • Sourcing We can't write anything that we don't have reliable sources for. Even if we know something to be true with absolute certainty, we can't insert it into an article if we don't have a source to show where the information has come from. (This is explained in detail at WP:V and WP:RS, if you're interested.) Above, I gave you a few links to some online resources that I was able to find mentioning the silo; there's enough there to write an article, but I'm always keen to find all the sources I possibly can before embarking on a new article, so I can structure the content to include all available information. If you know of any reliable, independent sources that I could use, please list them below, ideally with weblinks that will help me find them. If it's a book, the title and author should be enough. Do note that the stuff has to be published, accessible, and independent of the subject (so your own website wouldn't work).
  • COI concerns I don't know if you'd read the links I gave you before, but there are certain steps you are required to take to disclose your COI. I'm going to edit your userpage now so that it's compliant with WP:COI - I hope you don't mind, I'm just aware that you're new to editing and I'm not clear on whether you know how to do this - I don't want to see anyone raise your failure to do this so far as a problem. Please confirm you are happy with the change that I make. GirthSummit (blether) 08:34, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Cragend Silo

Just so you're aware, they do have a draft at Afc. You might as well build on that, although I'm not sure the title's quite right. KJP1 (talk) 09:51, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Decline in insect populations

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Decline in insect populations. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

AfC

Hello Girth Summit:

AfC Drive

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from June 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 2600 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

The AfC helper script can assist you in tallying your edits automatically. To view a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks. Sincerely, Masum Reza☎ 23:38, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
Masumrezarock100 Hi - are you quite sure about those dates? ;) GirthSummit (blether) 06:31, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Sorry I didn't notice the dates. Lol the template hasn't been updated! Actually there are over 3000 articles under submission. So I thought I should invite you as I noticed that you have the right. Sincerely, Masum Reza☎ 06:36, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

We need YOU!

Hello Girth Summit,

Unregistered editors cannot create articles on Wikipedia, but they can use the articles for creation process to submit drafts that registered editors can either accept and publish or decline. WikiProject Articles for creation is looking for experienced editors who want to partake in this peer review process. If you have what it takes to get involved, then please take a look at the reviewing instructions. To discuss specific AfC reviews, do so freely on the designated talk page.

There is currently a backlog of over 3000 drafts (432 very old).

If you know an editor who may be willing to help out, please use the template you are currently reading {{subst:WPAFCInvite}} to draw attention to this WikiProject. Many hands make light work!

Sincerely, Masum Reza☎ 06:47, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Cragend Farm and Silo

Hello, I would like it to be titled Cragend Farm, as the whole is what is important as listed in our building conditions of 2012 when the barn buildings were granted domestic use status. Northumberland County Council Conservation officers are in agreement with Historic England that the Farm is of heritage importance not just The Silo. The Silo and the Weighrbidge are sperate buldings on the farm, and within the barns is a Gilkes Turbine which drives the Silo. So all the buildings are relevant to the whole. The conservation officer said that the farm in its entirety was of importance. There are two documents recording the farm importance, 'An archaelogical building recording of Cragend Farm' by ARS for Northumberland County Council, and https://www.academia.edu/6936461/Recording_Farmworkers_Graffiti_at_Cragend_Farm_Rothbury Cragside also have a document done in 2010 which lists the silo and buildings but not the weighbridge (originall derelict and buried under earth) and turbine, which they missed, due to the fact it was not their property. We are now working with Cragside to add further detail to then history of the proerty and estate. Hope this all helps, from Lou . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lou Renwick (talk • contribs) 08:42, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

CVUA Training request

I was thinking about taking a CVUA training. Could you please train me? Sincerely, Masum Reza☎ 01:47, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi User:Masumrezarock100, I've just agreed to take on a second student, which is normally my limit - however, if you don't mind going slow, as I'll have less time to share around, I'll be happy to take you through the course. I'll set up your training page tomorrow, but in the meantime you could take a look at WP:VANDALISM and WP:TWINKLE. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 07:52, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
I am more than happy. As I have witnessed your teaching to Aryan, I say you are a good teacher. Well the school hasn't started yet after the entrance exam. I say I have two months to spare for full Wikipedia editing. Sincerely, Masum Reza☎ 09:21, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Cragend Farm and Silo

Hello, Firstly I am a woman (Lou) Hi again! Secondly, thank you so much for all the help I am getting to get this listing onto Wiki. We are farmers and just wanted to put right was was incorrect on wiki about the Cragside listing and add somethings that are relevant. Also Cragend Farm and Silo are all the same thing, its just that the Silo is listed. Ironically we have more machinery within the farm that is not, which is an over sight by the listers, for example the Weighbridge by Pooley and the Gilkes Turbine no 490. in the barns. I would be very happy for uou to help me with this listing and get some better acurrate photos upload to please? Whast do I have to do? best wishes from Lou . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lou Renwick (talk • contribs) 08:24, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi again Lou - first, I'm so sorry for assuming you were a man! I'm usually pretty good at using gender-neutral pronouns, I've no idea why I didn't do that in this case.
Did you read my instructions further up the webpage? I put some suggestions for what to do with images in bold - I you can follow those, we can use the image immediately.
Thanks for providing that additional source. Once I've read through that, and all the other sources I've been able to find, I'll consider whether the article should be called Cragend Silo or Cragend Farm. Just to be clear, this decision will be based upon what the sources describe as being notable. I appreciate what you are saying about the silo being a part of the farm, but we have quite strict rules about notability (see WP:NOTABILITY), and one of them is that notability is not inherited - so, the farm as a whole does not become notable just because it has a notable building in it - I would need to be able to demonstrate that the farm itself is notable, independent of the silo, in order to write an article called 'Cragend Farm'; if I can only demonstrate that the silo is notable, then I can mention the farm in the description of the silo, but the article will have to be called 'Cragend Silo' (or whatever name the sources give it). We can't go on what Historic England or Northumberland Council officers say, unless it has been published somewhere, so again, if you have any other published sources that would help in writing the article, please point me to them now. Cheers, and sorry again for my rude assumption before. GirthSummit (blether) 17:21, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi Lou - another question. I noticed on your blog that there was a SSSI on your farm - presumably there is documentation online pertaining to that? It would be an interesting thing to include in the article, if we can identify a source discussing it. If you know what the SSSI is called, if should be possible to identify it here, which would give us another good source. GirthSummit (blether) 10:36, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Some Counter Vandalism Training

Hello, it said on the list of trainers in the Counter Vandalism that you had a slot open (Albeit, last edit was 10 days ago and has not been updated frequently) and I was wondering if I could get some training in the realm of Counter Vandalism. Thanks. ^^ James-the-Charizard (talk) 03:02, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

@James-the-charizard: Sure, I'd be glad to take you through the course. I'm pretty busy this weekend, but I'll set up your training page and ping you from there on Monday. You might want to start out by reading WP:Vandalism and WP:Twinkle. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 06:35, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
@Girth Summit: Great, thanks! I'm actually somewhat busy myself this weekend. James-the-Charizard (talk) 08:25, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Actually I forgot to mention, I have school on weekdays too, so I will reply and get stuff done on it when I can, so apologies if it takes me a while to reply back. James-the-Charizard (talk) 11:09, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
​ No worries - we will go at your own pace, just ping me when you update the page so I know to go and look at it. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 11:11, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of the Mesozoic life of Wyoming

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of the Mesozoic life of Wyoming. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia Article translation - Is the enhancement and improvment of the original in terms of sources and references a requirement?

Hello Girth, I recently helped translating the following wikipedia page from Spanish to English.

Spanish Version https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Sociedad_Espa%C3%B1ola_de_F%C3%ADsica

Translation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Spanish_Royal_Physics_Society_(RSEF)

The entry was rejected with the following comment. Comment: I appreciate that this is a translation from another Wiki site, but we still require references to support the assertions and demonstrate notability. Are there no references at the Spanish wiki article that could be used? Girth Summit (blether) 14:52, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

But it’s an almost EXACT copy of the Spanish original which is alive and published. As reference it redirects to the original page in Spanish, since it’s a translation I am confused of what better reference than the original webpage I can provide.

Both Versions (Spanish and English) have been reviewed by the current president of the Spanish Royal Society of Physics. Jose Adolfo de Azcarraga - azcarrag@ific.uv.es

If the original content needs to be expanded for it to be published then the translation effort becomes more than just translation. I will look for additional sources to add but can it be published, as is, for the time being as a translation of the original with exactly the same content? Can you review the decision? Thanks in advance Guillermo

Hi Azwikig, thanks for reaching out. I confess that I'm not specifically experienced in vetting translations, but I would normally reject a draft that only contained external links rather than cited refs, but I definitely don't want all your hard work on the translation to go to waste. Let me check on the policy with regard to translations and get back to you. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 10:36, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello again Azwikig, I've had another read through the draft, the external links, and I've discussed this with a very experienced reviewer about the best way to go forward.
First, I should emphasise that different language Wikipedia sites have different standards and requirements - they are decided upon locally by consensus. I don't know anything about Spanish Wiki, but since this is an article on English Wiki I will have to apply our community standards to your draft.
Now, I have no doubt about the notability of the organisation - the Spanish Royal Society of Physics is certain to be notable. However, my problem is with your sourcing. Please take a look at WP:NCORP, which applies to this article - we require reliable, independent sourcing for all but the most basic facts about any organisation, and an article about an organisation must have as an absolute minimum two sources that meet the guidelines at WP:CORPDEPTH. Your article has no in-line citations at all, and the only links are to the society's own websites (which are not independent), and to the Spanish Wikipedia article (which, as WP:UGC, is not reliable - that's nothing about it being a Spanish site, we would apply that to an English Wikipedia article too.) So as it stands, I'm afraid that I can't approve this article.
I genuinely don't want all your effort to be wasted - what would be ideal is if you could find the time to add some sources to support the assertions, as described in the guidelines above. I'm sure such sources must exist for such a society - it's just a case of identifying them, and adding them to the article - I'll be happy to help you with adding the inline citations if you're not sure how to do that. Sources in the English language are preferable of course because of our reader base, but Spanish-language sources are allowed for material you can't find in English.
On a related matter, since it's clear you have a connection with the president of the organisation, you presumably have a conflict of interest with the subject of the article, and indeed may be being paid for your efforts here? You should read the guidelines at WP:COI and WP:PAID, and take the necessary actions.
There's one more question I would like to ask before proceeding. I couldn't help noticing the similarity between your username (Azwikig) and the e-mail address you gave for the president of the society (azcarrag@ific.uv.es). Can I ask whose account this is - yours, or Jose Adolfo de Azcarraga's? Please see WP:UPOL - each account must only be used by a single individual - accounts may not be shared or used by different people, and indeed they are generally blocked if it becomes apparent that more than one person has access to the password. I'd urge you to create your own account, and contact me here before proceeding.
I hope that all makes sense - please let me know if you have any questions, and how you'd like to proceed. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 17:37, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello Girth, Thanks for your note, will see what I can do to provide additional references. In terms of the conflict of interest. My father happens to be the President of the Spanish Royal Society of Physics and as such has an interest on the site being available in English. As his son I am trying to help him in this being available, I am a Physicist too and happy to help in this being possible. I am certainly not being paid for this. The account is my own wikipedia account. Hope this is OK. Best Regards Guillermo

Hi Guillermo, I'm happy to trust that the account is your own, and that you are not being paid; as the son of the president of the society though, you appear to have a clear conflict of interest -this is not a major problem, and you are doing the right thing already by going through the WP:AfC process - but please do note the guidelines at WP:COI and take the necessary steps with regard to disclosure - basically, you are advised to put a note on your userpage declaring your relationship with the subject of this article.
If you would be willing to find some sources to support the assertions in the article, I would be happy to help you with the in-line citations, and to work with you to get the article published. Do please drop me a line when you've got some to work with. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 20:41, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Superconductivity

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Superconductivity. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Userbox

Hey I saw the diff of Dante's Inferno in your userbox. Was it a joke or attack? Seriously, they were comparing you to the Devil! Sincerely,    Masum Reza☎ 12:28, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Yep - that was a vandal I'd reverted a few times. I reverted it, of course, but it made me laugh so I thought I'd record it with the userbox. It's  not something I do regularly - it's not within the spirit of WP:DENY, but  just this once... GirthSummit (blether) 12:53, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
Guess you are famous for vandal slaying. Oops it is vandalism slaying. Sincerely, Masum Reza☎ 13:01, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
​ Ah, now - remember what I said on the CVUA page - vandalism clean-up, no slaying involved! We don't have weapons, just a broom, a bucket of soapy water and a big sponge ;) GirthSummit (blether) 14:41, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Lady Roos

I added information that is easy for any person to validate. I am not going to help someone write their term paper but it should be enough added information to deduce important property and kinship ties.

Frankly, a perspective such as yours is why ancient information becomes obscured and eventually destroyed. Consider citations as a spectrum from 100 percent reliable to zero percent reliable. Even when a citation is added as a reference to a Wikipedia article, the value is negligible as a primary source. There should be multiple sources.

Rather than just remove factual information, use your intellect and investigate before deleting. Add the reference yourself if it exists in such a simplistic form. Or perhaps just look at the genealogy charts like any tenth grader would do.98.243.51.84 (talk) 12:01, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi - if you want to work collaboratively with other users, you need to drop that attitude - comments along the lines of telling me to do something 'like any tenth grader' are not appreciated.
You didn't add any citations at all to support your substantial addition of content - the requirement for assertions to be referenced isn't my perspective, it's the policy of the project, per WP:V and WP:RS. If the information is easy to validate, please go ahead and do so by citing a reliable source, being mindful of our policies on WP:OR. If there is no such source that you can cite, then the information doesn't belong here - our goal is not to collect ancient but unverifiable information, but is simply to reflect what reliable published sources say. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 12:19, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the details. I will add a reliable reference as a starting point.98.243.51.84 (talk) 12:43, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Let me know if you need any help with inserting in-line citations. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 23:12, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

The removal of my comments

My section was removed on the Richard E Jackson wiki page. It was supposedly removed for lacking a source. my addition to the page, however is a first hand account of Richard E Jackson. I would like to have my section added back o the article.

Hi User:Ya boi Wynn, thanks for reaching out. Did you read the links in the message I left on your talk page? Wikipedia is not the place to publish first-hand accounts or personal knowledge about any subject, most especially living people. Our mission is to reflect what reliable, published sources say about any subject. If the material you added cannot be supported by citing a published source, it can not be added to the page. Please do review the guidelines I linked to, they should help you get started with contributing to the project. Thanks again, and welcome to Wikipedia. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 15:10, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Quit pretending that only left-wing views are "neutral"

Your continued censoring of established facts as "not neutral" belies your pretense that you support strictly "neutral" editing. Nonsense. You only approve of leftwing delusions.

Hello anonymous editor from IP 67.78.207.202, thanks for reaching out. I'm assuming that I reverted an edit that you made, but since I don't know who you are or what article it was at, I have no way of knowing what you're talking about. If you'd like to explain your concerns, or provide a link to the article, I'd be happy to discuss them. GirthSummit (blether) 17:26, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Silage

Hi Girth Summit,

I was looking through RC and your edit summary caught my eye -- thought I'd drop you a note that Wikipedia does actually have an article about silage. aboideautalk 17:40, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

​ D'oh! Thanks - you have sharp eyes. It's not a word I use every day, and it doesn't give me a red squiggle - I did think it was a bit odd that we didn't have an article... Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 17:45, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jean-Pierre Petit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jean-Pierre Petit. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for mentoring me. Sincerely, Masum Reza☎ 10:39, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
CVU Anti-Vandalism Award
Mentoring all those students, reverting vandalism, It is not something that an ordinary editor is capable of. You deserved it. Sincerely, Masum Reza☎ 13:45, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Masumrezarock100 - in truth, I enjoy taking people through the course - it's fun working together with people who are eager to help maintain the project. I'm really glad it was helpful for you. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 16:26, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
It certainly was. Hey Girth how many students you have in real life? Just asking. Sincerely, Masum Reza☎ 16:29, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
I teach a few different classes - 15-20 kids in each of them, ages 8-13. GirthSummit (blether) 16:39, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
I see. Hey let me ask one thing. Am I the only one who completed the course within a week? Sincerely, Masum Reza☎ 02:28, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Ah, sorry - did you mean how many people I've taken through CVUA? That info is all on the CVUA trainers page - you're the third Wikipedian I've gone through it with. Certainly nobody else has completed it so quickly - I think that's down to the amount of time you've been putting into it each day, and also the fact that it was a holiday here, so I was able to respond to your updates more quickly. (When I did the course, I generally had to wait a few days each time for my trainer to find time to respond to my answers!) Cheers! GirthSummit (blether) 06:00, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cragend Silo has been accepted

Cragend Silo, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Zanhe (talk) 08:12, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Concern

Hi. In reference to your edit here, can you take a look at this new edit here? He seems to be granting himself admin rights again. This isn't good, especially a second time around. Also, while he often makes useful edits, almost as often Yarfpr and I have seen him do strange things with PR road articles (which seems to be the subject matter where he mostly edits). Yarfpr and I have left him numerous Talk page messages, but he has never responded. We have offered him our help, but to no avail, because he doesn't respond.

Then I noticed his edits are almost exclusive to Infobox road parameters which would require little or no English. Since I also discovered he had been editing the Spanish WP here, it occurred to me that perhaps he speaks only Spanish, so I wrote to him here, but using Spanish w/English translation (a bilingual message, so to speak). In the process, I also realized he seems to be the same user as Anonyn IP 24.50.193.43, who had been making similar strange edits concurrent with Harrison Canyon (See Here).

At one point, here, Yamil had to request page protection (I sort of talked her out of it) because of addition of bogus Puerto Rico road route marker shields by this user. Also, Yamil has been trying to do a really nice job with all Puerto Rico road articles, but she (as well as myself) spends a lot of her (precious, I am sure) time fixing bad edits by HC or explaining to him in his talk pages (we have written him here too (the Anonym user's Talk page).

I think we have reached a point where this user should be considered for some serious disciplinary action such, perhaps a block or some other action. I hope you can investigate or send this to someone who can. Thanks, Mercy11 (talk) 21:34, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Contrary to what Mercy11 thinks, I believe that Harrison Canyon and the anonymous user aren't the same person because when HC makes an unconstructive contribution, the anonymous user changes it for the previous version (see what happened today in the List of highways in Puerto Rico and Puerto Rico Highway 30 revision histories). On the other hand, when HC makes an appropriate contribution, the anonymous user doesn't always intervene (see what happened today in Puerto Rico Highway 6 and Puerto Rico Highway 866 revision histories). What I can see is a war between both editors and that warrants urgent disciplinary action. Yamil Rivera (talk) 00:51, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
It doesn't matter any longer. Please see here. Mercy11 (talk) 00:59, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Mercy11 - thanks for letting me know about this. I'm afraid I was in bed while all this was happening (I'm in the UK), so have just seen the messages. You did exactly what I would have done, i.e. take the matter to ANI, and I see that the account has been blocked as a sock of a blocked user. No action has been taken against the IP - if disruption continues from there, you could potentially raise a sock puppet investigation based on behavioural similarities - I can help you to do that if you're not sure how (it's much easier to do it using Twinkle than trying to fill in the form manually!). The alternative would be to ask for action to be taken to stop the disruption -again, if you feel this is necessary, let me know if I can help. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 05:49, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Holly Knight

Sorry for the confusion. It was not your edit that I referred to as vandalism but an edit prior to yours that removed mention of the Grammy wins. That same person had earlier claimed she had lied about them. I couldn't just revert that edit so I had to do it by hand and added a ref to go with it. Sorry, again, for the confusion. Hondo77 (talk)

​ OK, understood - no worries, I was probably a bit over aggressive there. If you check the article history you'll see that I reverted their edits, and warned them on their talk page - they went on to stalk other articles and remove Wikilinks to her. I made the edit when I was clearing up after them, because in fairness she didn't actually win those Grammies - they were awards for vocal artistry, won by the singers, rather than awards for the songwriting. I tried to make that clear in the lead - if you happen to know who the third artist who won with one of her songs was, we could add that to the lead? Cheers, and sorry for snarling :) GirthSummit (blether) 16:07, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Therapeutic abortion

Good morning Girth, how are you? I'm back to you after a while as I need a hint about the following issue. A newly regitered user replaced the content of Therapeutic abortion with a redirect to Abortion#Induced, claiming that they made it in accord with a decision taken in 2010. The page has been restored in 2015 and nobody complained for that until now; does this imply that there is a silent consensus for keeping the page or should the 2010 consensus be considered still valid? Your comment will be very appeciated. Thanks in advance and cheers, Horst Hof (talk) 08:38, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Horst Hof - good to hear from you again. This is a slightly complex case - it's certainly not a clear cut case of vandalism, and the redirect is arguably valid. However, a decision made in 2010 does not necessarily bind us today - consensus can change, and one could argue that the fact it was recreated and survived for so long reflects a consensus to overturn the previous decision. Having said all that, a quick look at the version that preceded the redirect showed a pretty poorly sourced article, with a lot of POV issues. The best thing to do might be to start a thread at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine, and describe what has happened - editors with knowledge and interest in this area would be able to chime in. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 09:58, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
​ I see you raised the question - Doc James is an admin, and one of the most experienced/prolific editors in medical areas, so I think the issue is in safe hands now. Well done avoiding the edit war trap here - a new account removing lots of content from potentially controversial pages is always red flag, but in this case it looks like it was a valid redirect. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 11:24, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for the good suggestion (as usual, by the way). When I meet a puzzling situation I'm used to ask myself "what would Girth do in this case?", and when I have no answer by myself... I ask Girth directly! :-)
A last question, do you think I better do a dummy edit on the redirect page indicating in the edit summary the link to the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine? This may inform other users about why the content removal has been accepted. Cheers, Horst Hof (talk) 11:43, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
​ That's not a bad idea actually - in case any other patrollers investigate the redirect, it would be useful to make the connection. Good thinking! GirthSummit (blether) 11:47, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Casualties of the Iraq War

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Casualties of the Iraq War. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Girth Summit. 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. Padavalam Kuttan Pilla  Talk  18:29, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Padavalamkuttanpilla, I got your e-mail. I'm afraid that I don't have any slots open at the moment, as I'm currently working with two other students. You could approach one of the other trainers listed here; alternatively, you could spend some time going through one of the training pages listed on my talk page in the 'How to edit' section - the Wikipedia Adventure is a sort of game that takes you through the editing process; the Tutorial is a more straightforward on-line tutorial; and the 'Student Training' page is aimed at teaching university students how to contribute to the project. Any of these might be a good way to develop your understanding of our pollicies and guidelines. If you have any questions, you are always welcome to ask them here - no need to e-mail me unless there's something sensitive that you don't want to post publicly. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 06:53, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rigel

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rigel. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Still researching

Thank you.Yes you are right it does not have much.But am still finding out about her birth date, where she grew up,her education and also her family.This also includes her acting an presenting career.But thanks for the comment.. Charlotte Peek (talk) 19:19, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Charlotte Peek - thanks for reaching out. The main thing you need to do is to provide references for the article - all articles on Wikipedia require references to reliable sources to make sure that the information is verifiable and the subject is notable. Those rules apply everywhere, but are enforced very stringently with articles about living people, for obvious reasons! Please add some reliable sources to your draft before re-submitting it - there is a 'Cite' tool just above the editing window, but if you have any questions about how to do this, feel free to drop me a note here. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 19:38, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
I would appreciate some help so please help me out.. Charlotte Peek (talk) 21:31, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
​Sure - how can I help? If you have some references to add to the article, if you paste the links below I'll take a look and explain how to add them to the draft. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 21:34, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Ooh ok.I really appreciate what you are doing for me but I don't have time to give you the links but I will do so when I get time. Charlotte Peek (talk) 21:40, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
​OK - let me know when you want to proceed. By the way, there's no need to start a new section every time you leave a new post - just edit the existing section. I've edited your posts so they are all in the ones section, and they are indented - you can read about how to do that here, it helps make talk pages more readable. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 21:55, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Father Richard Augustine Hay - new page

Hi there, thanks for your message. I am a newbie at this so I thanks you for your help and advice. I have updated the page and added some sources. However, a couple of the sources are my own published books (albeit from 15+ years ago). Is it alright to do that? I don't want to be accused of self-promotion! It is just that it is a subject that I am considered to an an expert in. Regards. Ericthearcher (talk) 09:25, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ericthearcher, you're welcome - thanks for writing the article. We welcome editors with expertise in the areas they want to write about, and there aren't any hard rules against citing work that you have written or contributed to. There are some relevant guidelines about referencing your own work that you might want to read at SELFCITE and REFSPAM - in general, provided that the sources are relevant, comply with the reliable sources guidelines, and you are not giving them undue weight within an article, there isn't going to be any problem.
I want to give you one other thing to think about - in declaring yourself to be the author of these works, you are effectively acknowledging your real-life identity. There are absolutely no rules against doing this, and many editors do it - however, should you ever come into conflict with anybody on-wiki, this connection might provide a way for them to harass you off-wiki. Many editors maintain their anonymity on-wiki to avoid this risk. It's entirely your choice, but it would be worth reading through HARASSMENT so you're aware of the steps to take should this ever happen. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 11:48, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.18

Hello Girth Summit,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:

  • Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
  • Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.
Reliable Sources for NPP

Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.

Backlog drive coming soon

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.

News
Discussions of interest

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Girth Summit. 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.Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:50, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:International Mass Spectrometry Foundation

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:International Mass Spectrometry Foundation. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Another review?

Hallo Girth Summit, if you like it and have the time, there is another article for you to be rinsed in Thames ;-). Bye. Alex2006 (talk) 17:42, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

​ Hi again - no problem. I'm in the pub at the moment, but I'm looking forward to reading it tomorrow. Cheers! GirthSummit (blether) 18:59, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! We had raclette with red wine yesterday evening (here winter came again in the last days), so I suppose that both of us had some concentration problem at the same time... ;-) Cheers Alex2006 (talk) 10:27, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
​ Hi Alex - what an interesting guy! Can't believe I'd never heard of him, I want to see the film now.
I've been through the article and tweaked some of the language. I've also tinkered with the spacing around the refs - just for future reference, normally we don't put a space before the ref, only after it. I haven't read through any of the sources - my Turkish is non-existent, and I don't really have time just now to use Google translate and try to make sense of the machine translation, but I assume that you have read through them carefully and are confident that they are reliable and support the assertions.
There are a few comments I've got about some of the content, which I'll put on the article talk page rather than here - hopefully they'll be easy fixes, but I think that's the proper place for a discussion about them. Cheers! GirthSummit (blether) 11:59, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Yes, this guy actually is very famous in Turkey (especially among the "modern" Turks, much less by the conservatives), but unknown abroad (although there are a couple of Wikipedias besides the Turkish one with an article about him). You are right about the refs, it is a copy paste error of mine, sorry! I know some Turkish, and actually I checked all the sources at my best. I will correct the mistakes on the discussion page now, then I will add a couple of infos about his private life (I found out that he had a fiancé ;-)): thanks a lot for your help! Alex2006 (talk) 16:08, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Advice needed

Hi Girth, how are you? I feel I need your advice once again... Please, have a look at this. I rollbacked as unsourced and defamatory and warned accordingly, but I'm asking myself if a revdel would be also appropriated... Thanks a lot in advance. Cheers, Horst Hof (talk) 07:43, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

@Horst Hof: Hi - I would say that does need to be revdelled. Have you used IRC to do this before - that's the quickest way to get attention. There's a link to the IRC channel on my userpage. I can't access IRC from my work computer (it gets blocked), so I can't do this immediately for you - if you're not confident about IRC, the next best alternative is to e-mail an admin on this list. As you probably know, putting links to stuff like that on talk pages isn't ideal, due to the Streisand effect, so IRC/e-mail is better. Let me know if you need any help with this. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 10:03, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Girth. You're always very kind and helpful. Cheers. Horst Hof (talk) 10:27, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
You're always welcome - thanks for keeping up the good work on counter vandalism! GirthSummit (blether) 10:32, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Mission accomplished! the edit has been revdelled... Cheers and thanks again, Horst Hof (talk) 12:03, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar
For going that extra mile to help out. Whispyhistory (talk) 17:55, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! It was great to meet you, I'm looking forward to working on the article. GirthSummit (blether) 18:12, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Teahouse logo

Hi Girth Summit! You created a thread called Is there anything like a 'Not to be confused with...' template for articles? at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 24 May 2019 (UTC)


Please comment on Talk:Facebook

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Facebook. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Knights Templar in Scotland

Hi there. Someone, anonymous, has made an addition to a page I am watching (intending to update it in the future). The addition is pure speculation and no source is cited. I was going to change it back to the original (reverting?) but I am not sure if I have the authority or ability (!) to do that. The change page is at: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Knights_Templar_in_Scotland&diff=next&oldid=897681626 Your advice would be much appreciated. Ericthearcher (talk) 15:56, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ericthearcher - in a situation like that, you have two options. You can revert to the previous version, or you can add a 'citation needed' tag (you do the latter by typing {{fact}} after the unsourced assertion. In this case, I think that reverting would be fine - you should leave an edit summary along the lines of 'This is unsourced - please discuss on talk page before reinserting'. Let me know if you user reinstates it after your reversion - don't be tempted to get into an 'edit war' with them, I'll help you take the appropriate action if they're re-reverting and refusing to discuss. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 16:03, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Juan Arias (horse trainer)

On subjects about which you have no knowledge it's probably a lot easier and would save everybody a lot of time if you have doubts about "notability" just to leave a note on Wikipedia:WikiProject Horse racing which is always on the article talk page. They have editors who know these things. Any horse, jockey, or trainer who wins the Kentucky Derby (the most important horse race in North America) gets a bio at Wikipedia. If they win the Preakness Stakes then they are one race away from horseracing immortality. Juan Arias is not just a horse racing legend in his native Venezuela, he is in N.A. as well. Also, the refs you installed have no titles and are in a different format? Did you want me to fix them and if so, should I change your format or am I using the wrong one? Thanks, appreciate your effort to help out. Stretchrunner (talk) 08:58, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Stretchrunner - thanks for reaching out, although I confess I've had friendlier introductions. I accept that I don't know a much about horse racing, but I do have a working understanding of notability and sourcing - when I reviewed this article, I saw only two sources, neither of which gave the subject anything better than trivial coverage - not enough to pass GNG. I did a quick check and found some sources with more significant coverage, but real life got in the way last night and I didn't have time to work them up fully, so added them to the page as bare URLs to ensure that another patroller didn't come along and nominate the article for deletion. As I tried to explain in my edit summary, I intended to work them up properly shortly - which I have started doing now. Give me a few minutes and they'll be sorted. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 09:20, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Apologies for slow responses on Counter Vandalism

I quickly needed to get this off my chest, I wanted to quickly apologize for not getting the next section of the course done in a timely manner, I’ve struggled with inconsistent motivation, and school work, and I will likely have even less time in the coming weeks as finals come closer. James-the-Charizard (talk) 03:25, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi James-the-Charizard - no problem, I completely understand that real life gets in the way sometimes. What do you want to do now? I'll be happy to put this on hold until your finals are over, and then we can pick it up afterwards; on the other hand, if your interest has waned and you just want to terminate the training now, that's fine too - we're all volunteers, there's no onus on you to complete the course if you are no longer interested. Just let me know what you prefer - and good luck with your finals! Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 17:21, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
@Girth Summit: I would like to keep it going at the moment, but I will pause when the studying for finals gets underway. I will keep you up to speed when that gets to be. Thanks. James-the-Charizard (talk) 17:31, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
@James-the-Charizard: Hope the course don't interfere with your study. I recommend you to resume the course after your finals (that's what I did). It will be lot quicker that way. Also you don't need to ping Girth on his talk page, talk page owners get notified by notification automatically. Masum Reza📞 12:48, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
@Masumrezarock100: My study for finals has not started yet (It won’t until the second to last week of school, which is starting from June 3rd) But I will time down Wikipedia a bit when we get to that point. I have education set first before this website. James-the-Charizard (talk) 13:00, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi James-the-Charizard - you've absolutely got your priorities right there! Whenever suits you, please read through the training page again to remind yourself where you are at, and pick up the next task. Ping me from there when you are ready for me to review your work, or if you have any questions you'd like me to look at. (Better to ask any questions about the content of the course there on the training page, so we can refer back to them later if necessary). Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 13:03, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Cullen Old Church

On 28 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cullen Old Church, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the internal organs of Elizabeth de Burgh, wife of Robert the Bruce, were buried at Cullen Old Church? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cullen Old Church. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Cullen Old Church), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Thames British School Draft

Thank you for taking the time out to review the article. I'll do my best to make the subsequent changes and resubmit it when I think I may have resolved the issues. Thanks again.

No problem Praevalebit - feel free to drop me a note if you want me to cast an eye over it before resubmitting - that might save you another long wait! Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 17:54, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
A comment on pinging: a notification is sent to a user if you enter a link to the user's page and you sign in the same edit. So when you fixed a link to User:Praevalebit above but did not add a new ~~~~ signature, then Praevalebit was not notified. --CiaPan (talk) 18:39, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi CiaPan - thanks for keeping an eye out - I actually knew that already, and even went as far as to type the word 'resign' in my edit summary, but for some reason I forgot to actually resign the post. My head must not be working properly today, I'll need to get it cleaned out... Hopefully Praevalebit will have see the reply following your ping. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 18:43, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
@Girth Summit:  :) CiaPan (talk) 18:50, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

I didn't check the 'talk page' here and didn't alert you of the changes before resubmitting. It would have been good for you to cast a glance over the article (I would have fully appreciated it!). Anyway, I think I managed to make the necessary changes... Praevalebit (talk) 19:23, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Praevalebit - I took a quick look at the sources you added. I'm afraid my Polish is non-existent, so I can't really assess the Przeglad document (it's a PDF, so I can't get Chrome to translate it for me), but that might be the best source - the Kuratorium source is a simple directory listing (not significant coverage), and the 'Our Kids' site has obviously been written by the school (not independent). I'll leave it for another reviewer, hopefully with appropriate language skills, to make the assessment, but anything else you can find and add would strengthen the case. BTW, I notice that your user page indicates that you work at a school in Warsaw, but you haven't specified whether it's this school. In my decline notice, I gave you some links to WP:COI and WP:PAID, please do review these - if you have any connection to this school, especially a financial one, it's important for you to declare that if you are going to write about it. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 11:21, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks again for checking. I thought those links may work, I can remove the OurKids one as it is a listing of the school but with an opinion written by OurKids itself (and I thought that might add some form of independent aspect to the page). The Kuratorium listing is a government website that lists the existence of every school registered in Poland so I thought that might be useful as well. The newspaper article is just a small article within the middle section of the newspaper which announces that there's a new school in Piaseczno. As for the school, it is true that I work for the school (and there's no financial incentive!) so I've just gone through with the declaration process (quite interesting!). Also, I would like to mention other school wiki pages (of international schools in Poland) link to their own websites but I thought those links I added might be enough as I'm having difficulty finding any better links. Please let me know what to do with the links I've submitted (now that you know my reasoning behind them :) ) Praevalebit (talk) 11:42, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Praevalebit, sorry if I wasn't clear - I don't think you need to remove those links, just that in and of themselves they aren't the best possible sources for the reasons I mentioned. If you can find anything else that's independent of the school that would be even better, but don't feel that you need to cut them at the moment. Thanks for clarifying your connection to the school. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 12:07, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

I suppose the issue is that we're a new school and we've relied on a lot of marketing to promote us via social media... They are the only 'independent' links I could find without having to delve into online forums ;). I've also had a look at the WikiProject/Schools guidelines and I'm trying to follow them step by step. Praevalebit (talk) 12:27, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

wrong accusation

it should be blindingly obvious why my edit was an improvement for neutrality and basic correctness. a foolish biased editor reverted it so i changed it back. then you issue a warning. are you dumb? use your brain, else wikipedia will be a junkyard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎86.141.32.224 (talk) 10:47, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi - you're going to need to drop that attitude if you want to edit here - calling another editor 'foolish and biased' is a personal attack (see NPA), and if you continue with your WP:BATTLEGROUND approach to content disputes your IP address will very soon be blocked from editing.
I'm afraid that it's not blindingly obvious to me that your edit was an improvement. This isn't the place to discuss that however - the section on the relevant talk page, which I created for you and directed you to, is the proper place for that. I warn you though that if you continue to make personal attacks and uncivil remarks, you will get pretty short shrift. GirthSummit (blether) 11:06, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
please note that your blind reverting of my reverting of some other fool's reverting of my good improvements to an article, was rather uncivil in itself, so you warranted my response. also note that while i am an expert on the subject matter i originally corrected, which was stupidly reverted, am not a wikipedia expert, so the proper place for me to do stuff is not jump hoops and hoops, it's to drop a message back to you in the only easy way i know, which happens to be the same gesture in how you dropped a message to me. the buck stops with you, the foolish editor, so you can clean up your own mess - i've worked enough on it which you've uncivilly blindly reverted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.32.224 (talk • contribs)
OK, first things first - there's no need to create a new section each time you post - just append comments to the existing section. You can read more about how to conduct talk page discussions at WP:THREAD.
Now, if you want to carry on any kind of discussion with me, or any other editor, you need to drop the attitude and stop insulting people. In your last post here you made a personal attack against another editor; I warned you about WP:NPA, and you've gone on to make one against me. I am not going to engage in any kind of discussion with you about content while you are insulting people. If you do that again, I will ask for administrative action to be taken against you. If you want to generate consensus for the changes you want to see made, I suggest you do it in a civil manner on the article talk page. GirthSummit (blether) 11:40, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

looks like you deleted my reply. perhaps you'd like to get back to actually undoing the problem you created instead of deflecting by talking about rudeness when in fact your initial act of blindly reverting my good work was ruder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.32.224 (talk • contribs)

Yes, your reply was removed. You may not make personal attacks against other editors. If you continue like that, I will block you from editing. SQLQuery me! 16:04, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
In reply to the IP editor - yes, I removed your post, because it included a profane personal attack. Please do not post on my talk page again. When you are unblocked, if you want to discuss the change you want to make to the article, please do it civilly, and on the relevant talk page (which is here). GirthSummit (blether) 16:48, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

An award for you!

CVU Anti-Vandalism Award
This is for your outstanding performance in saving Wikipedia from the harmful threats of vandalism. I appreciate your efforts and hardwork. Thank you. PATH SLOPU 11:26, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
Cheers, —PaleoNeonate – 13:18, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Andy Secombe

Hi, Girth,

Further to your comments - I am Andy Secombe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsebadger 1 (talk • contribs) 12:08, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Andy, thanks for reaching out. I'd be happy to discuss the changes you want to make, but first we should discuss your identity.
There are two strands to this - first, I currently don't know whether you genuinely are Andy Secombe or not - I have no reason not to believe you, but this is the internet... I'm sure you can appreciate that we can't take anonymous new accounts at face value when they claim to be the subject of an article. To address this matter, and verify that you are Andy Secombe, I recommend you confidentially contact experienced and trusted volunteers with information that verifies your identity. It's often enough, if you have an e-mail address shown on your personal website, to send an e-mail to the team from that account, rather than having to scan an official ID or similar.
Second, assuming you are Andy Secombe, that doesn't give you any particular authority over the content, the references it uses, or the maintenance tags. Actually, you're discouraged from editing it yourself except to correct simple, glaring errors, because you have a clear conflict of interest. You might be interested in reading about how we suggest dealing with articles about yourself.
So, if you have concerns about the content of the page, or you have some reliable sources that you think could be used to improve the content, please by all means put them on the talk page and I'll be happy to take a look. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 12:23, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bayer designation

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bayer designation. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - June 2019

Delivered June 2019 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

18:50, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Reference format.

Hi, thanks for correcting the way in which book references should appear - in this instance the article on Thomas Telford. I shall backtrack previous pages and amend them accordingly. All the best. Ericthearcher (talk) 13:11, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

​No problem - it popped up on my watchlist so I just took a quick look. If you use the 'Cite' tool (just at the top of the editing window), you'll see that you can choose from a drop-down list of templates - one of the options is 'cite book', and you just have to fill in the relevant fields to have it automatically format the reference for you. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 13:57, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Internet censorship in China

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Internet censorship in China. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

How to prevent my article from being removed by another user without any reasons?

-- Nafiszami (talk) 10:21, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Nafiszami, thanks for reaching out. I'm not sure which article you've been having difficulties with - have you created an article which got deleted, or do you mean that your additions to a particular article are being removed?
In general terms, any material that you add to an article ought to be OK provided that it is reliable sources, and you are not giving the issue too much weight (so for example writing large amounts of text about a minor issue). If there is disagreement about whether something you've added belongs in an article, you should discuss it on the talk page of that particular article - if you are having issues with this, I'd be happy to take a look and offer an opinion if you let me know which article it is.
There are a number of reasons why an article might have been deleted - the most common one is that the subject isn't demonstrably notable. There are lots of guidelines around this, but the most basic on is WP:GNG - a subject must have been given significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent, secondary sources in order for us to have an article about it. If you've written an article about a subject that doesn't have enough sources, it will likely be deleted as non-notable. If you have questions about this, you should discuss it with the administrator who deleted the page - they should be able to explain their reasoning to you.
I hope this is helpful - you could take a look at WP:Tutorial or WP:Adventure to find out more about editing in general. Let me know if there's anything you want me to take a look at. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 10:40, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Phew

I have been patrolling the deletions in the queue recently. I had just commented in IRC how most people don't seem to understand BLPPROD when I get to Froy Gutierrez and see sources and the tag and then saw you placed the tag - but of course the version you tagged didn't have the sources. So long story short, keep up the good work and thanks for being an NPP :). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:08, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

​Thanks! In my experience so far, a BLP PROD is far more likely to result in the author finding and adding some sources, rather than the page being deleted (at least for new pages where the author is still engaged with it). Still, if the aim is to avoid us having unreferenced BLPs, then either result achieves that end. Just out of interest, how does one look at the deletion queue? Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 06:52, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Girth Summit It's an option in the feed under Type. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 13:45, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
​ Interesting - I don't see that. When I go into 'Set Filters' in the New Page Feed, the only options it gives me are 'State', 'Predicted Class' and 'Potential Issues' - I see from the screenshot at WP:Page Curation/Help that I should also have 'Type' and 'That' options. Do you know whether there's a preferences flag I need to set, or a script I need to install or something? No biggie if you don't know, I can do some more reading around, just in case it's something simple. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 14:27, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Girth Summit Hmm. Sounds like you're at a weird resolution and need to scroll down? This should be the default setting for the feed and I see it even when in incognito mode (which might be worth trying to see if it's something with your scripts/settings or a browser/computer issue). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 14:54, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure it's not about scrolling down - I can see the green 'Set Filters' button at the bottom of the pop-up, and if I remember correctly I see the same thing on both my home and work PC, using either Google Chrome and Windows Edge. I'll play around with it a bit more and see if I can figure out what's happening, otherwise I might leave a note on NPP/Discussion to see if anyone else has had this. CheersGirthSummit (blether) 15:02, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
@Barkeep49:OK - what did you do? It just magically fixed itself - I changed nothing! I've never seen those options in all the time I've been using the feed, and suddenly they appear when I mention them to you - are you Gandalf? GirthSummit (blether) 15:46, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
I will neither confirm nor deny :). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:49, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Just checked on my home PC - I'm seeing all the options here, on Windows Edge (earlier I was on my work PC, using Chrome). So whatever spell you cast, it was pretty thorough. :) GirthSummit (blether) 16:55, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
When you're good, you're good. Glad you're all set for the future :). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:56, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Barkeep49 (talk · contribs)In all seriousness, did you actually do anything, or are you aware of any generic interface changes that happened yesterday? The page feed options are displaying properly for me now, but since last night I've noticed something odd has happened to the drop-down menu in Twinkle where you select the type of talk page warning to issue. I used to see the first dozen or so options when I opened the menu, now I just see the first five and have to scroll down - each option has got wider than it used to be. Again, this is happening on both PCs, and on both browsers - any ideas? GirthSummit (blether) 14:32, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Girth Summit, In all seriousness I did not do anything. There are regular things happening with NPP development at the moment but nothing that was committed which should have made any difference here. There was Twinkle development yesterday. Amory could have anything have changed for Girth here? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 14:48, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, that was a change to Twinkle's warning system. Some discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Twinkle#User_warning_dialog_dropdown_selector, but you shouldn't need to scroll or use the mouse anymore; simply typing something related to what you want should pull it up. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:52, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks both. Can't say I'm a fan of the Twinkle change - I'm having to search for an option that, maybe 7 times out of 10, was previously displyed by default. I don't mind the addition of a search window, but having it at the cost of obscuring the thing I actually wanted doesn't seem ideal. I'll add my tuppence worth to the discussion you linked to anyway. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 15:39, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

York Medical Society

Hi...thanks for your help. I can't think what else to do so will leave for now and add whenever any further information comes along. Whispyhistory (talk) 08:51, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Whispyhistory - yeah, it's looking pretty good I think. I just had another look, and didn't like having a redlink in the lead, so I've retargeted the 'medical society' link to Learned society - that can be undone if anyone gets around to writing an article about Medical Societies in general (a project for another day, perhaps?!). Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 09:21, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

halp

what did i do to that page i forget i know you delted it what exactly did i do to it? it was a while ago plz refresh me B — Preceding unsigned comment added by AntiVaxSoccerMom (talk • contribs) 13:57, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi AntiVaxSoccerMom - as you say, it was a while ago, I don't recall the specifics. I didn't delete the page, I nominated it for deletion. It was reviewed by an administrator, who agreed with my assessment and deleted the page, so I am no longer able to view it. It was deleted as a 'G10', which means that it was classified as an attack page - it presumably attacked an identifiable individual. WP:UP gives information about what is, and is not, allowed on talk pages - basically, your talk page should be about yourself and your activities on Wikipedia, not to criticise other people. I hope that's helpful, regards GirthSummit (blether) 14:03, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

User talk:SHAILYYA

Not sure why you templated me about speedy deletion of User talk:SHAILYYA. I certainly didn't create it. I nominated the user's sandbox for deletion here which may have made me the first editor to contribute to the talk page. Perhaps a little caution might have been better I shall now delete the template message unless it has some deeper hidden meaning that has been lost on me. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   15:54, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Velella - apologies, I didn't realise I'd done that. I nominated the page for speedy delete because they'd put a load of promotional guff on the page - the template was issued automatically when I nominated it, I clearly should have unchecked the 'Notify author' option however, since you created the page. No offense meant, please do go ahead and delete the irrelevant template. Cheers. GirthSummit (blether) 17:06, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, just to add having reread your post - if you are the first person to comment on a talk page, you are logged as having created the page - hence why you received the notification rather than them. Hope that makes sense, apologies again for the distraction. GirthSummit (blether) 17:08, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Brexit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Brexit. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

How can I put information on my User page?

Dear Girth Summit, thank you for your offer to help me out as a Wikipedia newby. I have three questions that you may be able to answer.
1. What is a "talk page"? Is it synonymous with "user page" or is it a different entity?
2. How can I write something about myself on my user page? I thought I was doing that but evidently I was writing an "article". I tried again but now it says: "Anthony Bradbury talk contribs deleted page User:Mkatan (U5: Misuse of Wikipedia as a web host) (thank)". I entered a link to my conflicts of interest on what I thought was my user page (it was headed by a tab entitled "user page" and a heading User:Mkatan). Is it illegal to report your conflicts of interest on Wikipedia?
3. Is this the correct route for asking you questions?
Mkatan (talk) 20:51, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Mkatan, thanks for reaching out, and welcome to Wikipedia! Briefly...
1 - So, you have your own personal talk page, which you can access right at the top of the page, towards the right, where it says 'Talk'. Individual articles also have their own talk pages, which you get to by clicking on the 'Talk' tab next to the 'Article' tab, near the Wikipedia logo towards the left of the page. User talk pages are mostly used for chatting about editing and asking for help (like we're doing now!); article talk pages are for discussing changes to the specific article they're attached to.
2 - Right at the top of the page, roughly in the middle, you should have a link to your own user page (it will say 'Mkatan'). Go there, and hit edit, and you can edit it. The guidelines for what you can, and can not, have on there are here. In short, you can have a bit of information about yourself, and say what sort of areas you want to edit in, but it should be about your activities here; it shouldn't be a CV, or appear to be promoting yourself. The page I asked to be deleted wasn't your user page, you managed to create an actual article about yourself - I realise you didn't mean to do that, no harm done, but please don't be offended that I asked for it to be removed.
3 - Yes! You can also ask for help here, where lots of editors will be able to see your questions and offer assistance.
Finally - if you want to learn more about editing, you could take a look at the TUTORIAL, or the ADVENTURE, which is more of a game that takes you through the process.
Feel free to pop back here if you have any more questions. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 21:01, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:5G

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:5G. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Don't edit my talk page

Do not edit my talk page like you have done here [5]. Under no circumstances are you allowed to take this kind of action.Sourcerery (talk) 18:05, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

I'm not looking for any kind of conflict with you Sourcerery, I thought I was doing you a favour. Another user made a simple mistake (he inserted a message to you in the wrong section), he fixed it himself (by removing it from the wrong section, and adding it to the correct section), and your revert reinstated it - I'd assumed you'd done that by accident, without noticing that he'd reinserted his message in the right place. Now I'm wondering whether it wasn't an accident - did you intentionally reinstate another user's mistake after they'd fixed it? GirthSummit (blether) 06:31, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
His edit summery implied he was trying to make some point, yes.Slatersteven (talk) 08:11, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Hey, Girth, thanks for helping us out on the Knights of St. John International Page-- it's a work-in-progress for us, and your assistance helped out a lot, thank you! DHalleaux (talk) 13:01, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:William Happer

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:William Happer. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

New message from Winged Blades of Godric

Hello, Girth Summit. You have new messages at Winged Blades of Godric's talk page.
Message added 13:23, 18 June 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

∯WBGconverse 13:23, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Polyphenol

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Polyphenol. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the review

Just thanking you for your rapid review of my presently rather brief article on Marian Henderson. It's appreciated! Cheers - Tony Tony 1212 (talk) 19:02, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Cragend Silo and Weighbridge

Dear Girth Thank you fro the entries so far. I have photos that are better than that but we are insanely busy at moment so I may try and do that later when the work is complete. I am still so unclear how to use wiki so we really appreocate your input. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lou Renwick (talk • contribs) 12:41, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

​Hi Lou, good to hear from you. Good to know you have some better pictures available - let me know if you need a hand uploading them. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 13:01, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Electronic cigarette

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Electronic cigarette. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 25 June 2019 (UTC) Remove templated message

I'm new and very confused, could you please help me?

Dear Girth,

You just edited a page a created, René Barbera (my first!) and deleted most of the content. You actually left a lot of valuable feedback, so I'm grateful to you already!

I was wondering if you could give me a few more pointers. Barbera is a client, and my job is usually to update his website, so my main source of information is his official bio, handed to us by his management. Should I source every single role debut with the venues' websites? Mainly, how do I make sure the stuff I write stays on the page and doesn't get deleted?

Thank you so much!!

Lilith89ibz (talk) 04:03, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Lilith89ibz - thanks for reaching out here, and for explaining your situation with regard to Barbera. I'll be happy to help you get started.
First off, I removed most of the material for two reasons. First, some of it was a copyright violation of Barbera's website - you cannot copy and paste from websites. Please take a look at WP:COPYVIO for more of this.
The bulk of the material I removed wasn't copyvio, but it was unsourced - see WP:V and WP:RS. We need reliable, secondary independent sources - not his own website - to support content.
Now, there's a couple of other things I'm going to ask that you read - WP:COI and WP:PAID. If the subject is your client, you must not edit the article directly. You can request changes on the article talk page, and I'd be happy for you to ping me and ask me to take a look at any edits you want to make - but your conflict of interest means that you shouldn't change the article yourself. (Also, for future reference, you shouldn't publish articles yourself about your clients - you should go through the WP:AfC system).
I'm going to put a template on your userpage with more information about COI - please don't take this as hostile, I just want to make sure you have all the information. Please let me know if you have any questions about this, and if there are any changes you'd like me to consider for the article. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 06:38, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Dear Girth,

Oh, don't worry, I know you're trying to help!

If copyright was the issue, I could donate the bio to Wikipedia since we own the rights, but it seems the conflict of interest is the bigger problem. To be clear, my job is not to make him look good, just for him to have a Wikipedia page. I'm perfectly happy with it as it is, stating his debuts and so on as facts and that's it. I've added citations for everything from the venues websites. Could you please review it and see if it's alright? I would really appreciate it if the banner at the top was removed, if you find no issues with it. As I mentioned, this is the first time I make a Wiki page for anybody, so it's not something I do at all, but I'll make sure I do it properly if there's a next time. Thank you so much for your help!

Lilith89ibz (talk) 01:19, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Lilith89ibz - before we discuss any further changes to the article (such as the removal of the banner), please confirm that you have read WP:COI and WP:PAID, and taken the steps described there towards declaration of your connection to the subject. Thanks GirthSummit (blether) 12:11, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Girth,

I've read it, but I'm not sure what I need to do. I think the idea is to add the "Connected contributor (paid)" template to my own talk page, correct? I don't even think I'm using this talk page right because I'm editing the time stamp manually, which can't possibly be the easiest way to do this... Do I add the template at the top of my talk page only or is it also meant to be on Barbera's page somewhere? My confusion is mostly about the how and where. I really appreciate this, you've been really helpful. Thank you again!

Lilith89ibz (talk) 17:06, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Lilith89ibz, I'm assuming that you are paid for your work for Barbera? If so, you need to declare your employer, client and affiliation with respect to any payment you receive. You can do that in one of three ways - on your user page, on the article talk page whenever you make an edit, or in the edit summary any time you make an edit. By far the easiest way for you to do this is with a simple statement on your user page. If you're not sure how to add that statement, I can do it for you - just tell me who your employer is, and whether you intend to edit on behalf of any other clients apart from Barbera.
There's no need to manually type in a timestamp - when you leave any comment on a talk page, just add four tildes like this: <no wiki>GirthSummit (blether) 06:58, 26 June 2019 (UTC)</no wiki> When you publish the change, that will automatically be converted into a signature and timestamp. You might want to read through the TUTORIAL to find out more about editing. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 06:58, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Girth,

Yes, my employer is Lenny's Studio, and Barbera is our client. My job usually only involves creating content for new websites and I have never spoken to him, so I don't know what you'd say my affiliation to him is, but I'm sure you know how to qualify it! If you could add the statement to my page, that would be fantastic. It's really sweet of you, thank you!

I don't intend to edit or create any other Wikipedia pages on behalf of clients, but I'll make sure to do it properly if there's ever a next time.

HA, so that's how you do it. Thank you for that too, I really need to do some reading!

Lilith89ibz (talk) 04:59, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

@Lilith89ibz: Hi, I've added the templates to your talk page as requested. When I get a moment I'll take another look at the article and create a section on the talk page there to discuss any changes I think might be necessary and the removal of the banner. GirthSummit (blether) 12:09, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Girth,

Thank you so much, it looks very official!

Lilith89ibz (talk) 01:18, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Criticism of Huawei

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Criticism of Huawei. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

A thanks.

I wanted to share my deep thanks for setting up the CVUA and helping me along the way so far. We may have lots to go but I wanted to thank you for helping me so far. James-the-Charizard (talk) 18:32, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

​You're truly welcome - thank you for offering to help with the project! GirthSummit (blether) 18:35, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Uploaded Images/ Transfer Proticol for Creative Commons

Hi Girth: Can you send me guidelines for transferring all of my uploaded images to 'Creative Commons"? Can an editor do this easily?

Thank you for your help! Dave soriano — Preceding unsigned comment added by David S. Soriano (talk • contribs) 19:57, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi David S. Soriano - I got your e-mails, I'm drafting a response you your talk page - give me a minute... Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 20:10, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019

Hello Girth Summit,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

More new features are being added to the feed, including the important red alert for previously deleted pages. This will only work if it is selected in your filters. Best is to 'select all'. Do take a moment to check out all the new features if you have not already done so. If anything is not working as it should, please let us know at NPR. There is now also a live queue of AfC submissions in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to review AfCs, but bear in mind that NPP is an official process and policy and is more important.

QUALITY of REVIEWING

Articles are still not always being checked thoroughly enough. If you are not sure what to do, leave the article for a more experienced reviewer. Please be on the alert for any incongruities in patrolling and help your colleagues where possible; report patrollers and autopatrolled article creators who are ostensibly undeclared paid editors. The displayed ORES alerts offer a greater 'at-a-glance' overview, but the new challenges in detecting unwanted new content and sub-standard reviewing do not necessarily make patrolling any easier, nevertheless the work may have a renewed interest factor of a different kind. A vibrant community of reviewers is always ready to help at NPR.

Backlog

The backlog is still far too high at between 7,000 and 8,000. Of around 700 user rights holders, 80% of the reviewing is being done by just TWO users. In the light of more and more subtle advertising and undeclared paid editing, New Page Reviewing is becoming more critical than ever.

Move to draft

NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations.

Notifying users

Remember to use the message feature if you are just tagging an article for maintenance rather than deletion. Otherwise articles are likely to remain perma-tagged. Many creators are SPA and have no intention of returning to Wikipedia. Use the feature too for leaving a friendly note note for the author of a first article you found well made or interesting. Many have told us they find such comments particularly welcoming and encouraging.

PERM

Admins are now taking advantage of the new time-limited user rights feature. If you have recently been accorded NPR, do check your user rights to see if this affects you. Depending on your user account preferences, you may receive automated notifications of your rights changes. Requests for permissions are not mini-RfAs. Helpful comments are welcome if absolutely necessary, but the bot does a lot of the work and the final decision is reserved for admins who do thorough research anyway.

Other news

School and academic holidays will begin soon in various places around the Western world. Be on the lookout for the usual increase in hoax, attack, and other junk pages.

Our next newsletter might be announcing details of a possible election for co-ordinators of NPR. If you think you have what it takes to micro manage NPR, take a look at New Page Review Coordinators - it's a job that requires a lot of time and dedication.

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Girth_Summit/Archive_2&oldid=1199749646"