This is an archive of past discussions with User:Galobtter. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi, Galobbter. I appreciated your help with the problem related to Italians in Albania. Unfortunately I am facing something similar problem of possible "abuse" with another article: Lavori Pubblici (1947-1990). Can you help me with your precious advice? If you agree that cannot exist this article together with the one called Jeenyo United FC, I will accept what seems a "provocation" by User:Number 57, who first agrees in accepting the article, writing to me: "Number 57 moved page Lavori Publici (1947-1990) to Lavori Publici over redirect" (and that I have accepted with a friendly OK) and one hour later erased it all. Regards, --Esauster (talk) 19:56, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
Sincerely I did not understand the "message" from this admin: to me it remembers a bit the word "ABUSE" with newcomers by a kind of boss....but anyway, thanks for your previous help.--Esauster (talk) 20:15, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
Ok. I trust you. But I want to pinpoint that this admin has written in my talk page this "(my question: So, why exists the U.S. Internazionale Napoli and the Napoli FC, to name only one example of the many articles (about historical football teams NOT merged into actual football teams) that I have found in en.Wikipedia?--Esauster (talk) 20:50, 20 October 2018 (UTC))….Admin answer: Because that was a merger between two clubs to create a new one, not a single club being renamed. In those cases separate articles are justified. Number57 21:32, 20 October 2018 (UTC)". So, if two clubs merge, separate articles are justified.....and in the case of Lavori Publici this is exactly what happened! After 22 years was created the team Jeenyo United FC with the union (as the word "united" clearly indicated) of the "Lavori Publici" closed in 1990 and the team (that had played in second division) "Geeska Afrika" (read data on this team here: http://www.rsssf.com/tabless/soma2-05.html). So, why Napoli FC & US Internazionale Napoli yes and Jeenyo & Lavori Publici no?...cheers, --Esauster (talk) 14:51, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
If a club is renamed, it is not a separate club, so there is no justification for a separate article; hence why Ardwick A.F.C. is a redirect to Manchester City F.C.
In the case of Lavori Publici/Jeenyo United, the club was just re-established under a different name (source). There was no merger with Geeksa Afrika, who have continued to exist separately to Jeenyo United (see here), so I don't know why you've mentioned them. Number5715:04, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Well, I see this admin "rules" everything...also the talk pages of others.....anyway I want to pinpoint that when LLPP was recreated, after 22 years of being OFFICIALLY closed, it was united (as the name UNITED indicated) by somalian managers with Geeksa that was in a third level, but soon they had problems (in actual Somalia all seems to be a "fighting") and the Geeksa team was returned to the lower level with his management. But the recreation was OFFICIALLY done between LLPP and Geeksa. Of course, all these changes can happen only in a country like it is now Somalia.... --Esauster (talk) 15:36, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Furthermore, I have to add that not all the information I get about LLPP is from the internet (like happens with most of people and also with you, I surmise), but also from a friend who is from Somalia. He is now searching about why there it is the word UNITED in the new name of the actual football team. He thinks that there are more than two former teams that have been united in order to create the actual "Jeenyo United FC". He is well informed: for example, he told me that the word Jeenyo is the translation of the Italian word Genio (and later I have found on the internet that he is right). So I think there it is a high probability that there were at least 3 old football teams "united". --Esauster (talk) 18:19, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I know the rule about original research....it is going to be difficult in the case of Somalia (with all the related problems about "reliable", as we all know in such a devastated country), and my somalian friend has been informed about this rule.....at least I can say that I am doing all I can do to "save" from merger the LLPP article. Thanks again for your help/advice. --Esauster (talk) 18:39, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.
Hello Galobtter, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!
Backlog
As of 21 October 2018[update], there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.
Community Wishlist Proposal
There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this proposal!
Project updates
ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.
Galobtter, Looks like someone beat me to it. Thanks for an explanation I was scratching my head trying to figure out what was going on. And thanks in general for all the diligent work you are doing searching for an helping to remove copyright issues. S Philbrick(Talk)18:25, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
Dear friend, I hope that this is the proper way to communicate. Yes, it was my first addition to the English version of Wikipedia (but I have made more in the Greek version). Still, I am a novice in terms of adding stuff, but I long-time user and very much a supporter of what Wikipedia stands for. I had no problem with the initial rejection of my edit. I understand the reason. As a professional in communications, I consider posts on social media an on-the-record position, worth tracking. But I am not going to argue in my first post on the merits of a long-standing policy. I appreciate the hard work of the editors and the enormous responsibility. Needless to say that I appreciate the fact that ultimately my edit was accepted. I appreciate it very much taking time to deal with all this, which shows care and professionalism. Which, I guess, is a long-winded way to say thank you for all you are doing to keep Wikipedia relevant and a reliable and unbiased source of information. Thanks again. (PS> I really hope this is a message that is read by the person who edited my piece :-) ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by StratosAthens (talk • contribs)
StratosAthens Thanks. Sending a message here or on your talk page are both reasonable places to communicate. Usually here we don't add every post of social media as people make a lot of tweets; as however his tweets did get covered in sources it was a reasonable inclusion in the end. I hope you as a long-time user become a long-time editor :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:00, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
I checked, you joined the project in 2013. So you joined when the footnote reference style had firmly been in place as the predominant reference style for over half a decade.
I started contributing here in 2004, when there were no reference sections.
I made thousands of edits in 2005 and early 2006, where I used the WP:Footnote3 reference style. And I converted articles from that style to the footnote style. I know these two reference styles absolutely cannot be mixed. I know this conversion is best done by someone with some familiarity with both styles.
I assure you, it is highly annoying to have people mistakenly apply the very wise warnings about recklessly mixing completely incompatible styles talo the use of the two completely compatible methods of using the footnote reference style.
Thanks for drawing my attention to Help_talk:List-defined_references. WRT to the order of precedence of wikidocuments, do guidelines take precedence over howtos? Policies and guidelines certainly take precedence over essays and user essays. WP:CITEVAR is a guideline. Help:List-defined references is a howto.
Geo Swan, Whatever the history, currently list defined references are considered different from other styles - different enough for WP:CITEVAR to apply (using CS1 references and non-CS1 references are also technically compatible but still mixing different styles per CITEVAR - "removing citation templates from an article that uses them consistently") . I suppose a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Citing sources could clarify this if this is considered unclear though I note that so far everyone other than you seems to agree that list defined references are a different style from what is used in the article, and as I said CITEVAR says specifically to not switch from using references defined in prose and in reflist ("moving reference definitions in the reflist to the prose, or moving reference definitions from the prose into the reflist"). Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:09, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Shouldn't the term "style" be reserved for distinguishing between the genuinely incompatible reference styles, and not applied to alternate methods of using a single style?
You wrote "CITEVAR says specifically to not switch from using references defined in prose and in reflist." then you quote what CITEVAR actually says to avoid: "moving reference definitions in the reflist to the prose, or moving reference definitions from the prose into the reflist".
So, CITEVAR says to avoid doing what you did. You moved references. Is adding brand new list-defined references "switching". I suggest adding brand new list-defined references is absolutely not barred by CITEVAR, when the other wikidocument says "some or all" of an article's references can be list-defined references.
Clarification please, did you mean to suggest I had lapsed by "removing citation templates from an article that uses them consistently". If so I dispute this assertion I removed any references.
WRT everyone else seems to agree... And, sorry, I continue to have doubts over how everyone seems to confuse references styles that can't be mixed, with the two compatible and compliant places a contributor can place their brand new references. Geo Swan (talk) 11:29, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Request on 23:06:22, 1 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by KT987
Hi there, I made a submission for Nventify, and not sure why it has been declined. Is there a way to get more clear help on the reasoning, or help with writing?
Hello: I must disagree with your decision on the Goodreads templates. First, proper procedure was not followed because notice of the deletion discussion was not posted on the template talk pages. Next, the number of editors commenting did not constitute a quorum (IPs carry less weight than experienced, longtime editors). Third, the points I raised re rationales for deletion were not addressed (e.g., the 4 criteria and recommended solutions for improper use of the templates), Finally, the “spammy” argument for deletion is unsound — we have “spammy” linking templates for many user-accessible web-pages such as IMDb, Rotten Tomatoes, ESPN, Turner Classic Movies, and more — each of these is connected/owned by for-profit companies. (When there is a problem it is with the ‘’use’’ of the template, not the template itself. I urge you to go back and re-close the discussion as a “no-consenses”, which is your privilege to do so. Thank you. – S. Rich (talk) 08:15, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
First, proper procedure was not followed because notice of the deletion discussion was not posted on the template talk pages. There was a notice on the template page; that is all is required (and the notice also displays on the hundreds of pages where the template is transcluded on).
Next, the number of editors commenting did not constitute a quorum (IPs carry less weight than experienced, longtime editors). IPs are human, and their !votes carry the same weight as a experienced user with an account unless there is evidence of block evasion/socking. And apart from the IP there were ~6-7 editors either with an explicit bold "delete" !vote or arguing that the links have no value; well enough participation for a quorum.
Third, the points I raised re rationales for deletion were not addressed (e.g., the 4 criteria and recommended solutions for improper use of the templates) The editors argued that every use, or nearly every use, violated a guideline - WP:EL.
Regarding your last point, I note that people's arguments were more than that it was for-profit; they argued that the links had no value; you made your argument at the Tfd and almost everyone else at that Tfd disagreed.
I could be convinced to relist, but considering that there was already a previous discussion at WP:ELN where I read the consensus as against inclusion, further discussion seems unlikely to change the outcome unless you can bring up a new point. Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:46, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
Awesome Wikipedians
Hello Galobtter.
Rebestalic here again. (We've seen each other a lot, haven't we?)
A userbox says that you became an Awesome Wkipedian on May 1. Does that mean that May 1 is a "day of recognition" in your name?
In this edit [2] of Template:Portal-inline you removed |text=, which allowed for custom text. Would you mind adding it back by replacing {{#if:{{{short|}}}|{{{1|}}}|{{{1|}}} portal}} with {{{text|{{#if:{{{short|}}}|{{{1|}}}|{{{1|}}} portal}}}}} ? Thanks, – BrandonXLF(t@lk)01:25, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.
Hello Galobtter,
Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW
Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.
If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.
We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.
Hello, Galobtter. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Thank you for attempting to close this discussion. However, I would like to see some arguments in the close which go beyond the simple count of votes, since the oppose side presented pretty detailed motivation. Would you please either unclose or read write the extended motivation. Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:54, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Whenever I close any discussion, I always read the whole rationales of everyone commenting. Per your request, I've added an explanation of the result; I hope that, though I know that you dislike the result, that you find the explanation reasonable for why the consensus was against you here. Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:32, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. Whereas I indeed do not like the result, I am not going to contest it at this point, as you have sufficiently substantiated your rationale. (I might join if someone else contests it, but this seems to be unlikely since nobody cares about this infobox, I am just left alone with all this shit to sort out).--Ymblanter (talk) 07:37, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Hey Galobtter, why did you delete the page ?
What is advertising or promotional meaning when i simply transform a companies page from one language to another ?
Looks like many companies have a profile about their history, products and achievments.
Happy to read your professional proposal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosenstock2612 (talk • contribs) 16:31, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
First of all, I didn't delete the page; an admin reviewed my nomination of the page for deletion and deleted it. Anyways, I don't remember what the text of the page was; but that it was translated from another language does not mean that original version or the translation isn't promotional or promoting the company. Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:40, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) It was an article about a furniture company started by a professional footballer. I've recreated DEDON as a redirect to Robert Dekeyser; I think that article covers the company adequately and has numerous citations backing the facts up. FWIW I think Galobtter was right to tag the article as it looked far too much like advertising copy. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)21:00, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Is there a reason for your ridiculous notification, or are you in the habit of adding random notices to peoples's talk pages? --Calton | Talk15:51, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi - thanks for your review of a page I created. I'm assuming I did something incorrectly...the page is gone and it redirects back to the band page. Can you help me understand? I'm a novice at this, just trying to help with an occasional contribution. Thanks Galobtter. Nihil7 (talk) 23:17, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Nihil7, Hello. You haven't done anything incorrectly; however we have standards of notability for the creation of a standalone article, and the album appears to clearly fail that, and so I redirected the article to the article on the band. See also this quick run down of what a separate article requires: "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject"; and the guideline notability for albums. Maybe see if you can find some good reliable sources on Madder Mortem and expand the article on the band? Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:02, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
Just checking
Hello G. I hope you are well. I wanted to check about the Template:Infobox Olympic Sailing that you added to the Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Holding cell#To orphan. Although the outcome is delete I think it needs to be either substitute or merge. The discussion mentions that it is redundant to Template:Infobox Olympic event. So when you get to an article where the IOS is used like Sailing at the 1984 Summer Olympics if you remove it there won't be an infobox in the article at all. As I look at it there are some fiddly bits that need to be done to make sure all the info from IOS transfers over to the IOe but I'm not sure what all needs to be done as the sandman is calling and I'm about to head to saw some logs - is that enough sleep metaphors for you :-) If I am missing something my apologies. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk08:04, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
IN THE END OF FIRST LINE THERE ARE 2 CITATION INDICATING THAT THERE ARE MANY LEGAL CASES AGAINST FIITJEE, WHY ARE THEY PRESENT WITHOUT ANYTHING MENTIONING ABOUT IT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:3e80:1800:10::7a1 (talk) 13:59, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
I do not know what you did, but you rescued all the good edits that bot had thrown out along with the youtube link it took objection too. Your effort saves me time in redoing those. Thank you. 222.164.212.168 (talk) 17:00, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
Revised Version with Suggested Changes
Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).Ref at the URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Shyama_Raju Hi Frayae, New draft now up with more specific reference to notability guidelines, as suggested. As per the suggestions, the entire article has been rewrite. Try to keep the tone of the article neutral find the revised version. Thanks very much.
Vmaske, I checked the references, and the sources that are not "trivial mentions" of him as described in WP:SIGCOV are a couple of interviews about the university he runs which is not coverage about him to make him notable per the general notability guideline. Like I said before, if you want you can resubmit with the best references to get another opinion; however my suggestion is you direct your efforts to an existing article or a notable subject since it doesn't look like Shyamu Raju is notable enough for an article. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:28, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Congratulations
on passing the 200 mark and making it:-) FWIW, I noticed your Hindi-babel-box for the first time and out of lame curiosity, do you know any other Indic language? ∯WBGconverse20:46, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
I have a question about the SQL query that generates User:Galobot/report/Articles by Lint Errors. Is it possible to exclude the Lint error group called "Obsolete HTML tags"? I have no interest in replacing these low-priority tags, and there does not appear to be a firm consensus that they should be removed. Thanks for anything you can do. The report has been very useful to me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:05, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Now that I supported your RfA, you owe me an explanation! You said that the pingó mió in your sig means ping me. I can't think of a language where that would be so. Am I missing a language?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:48, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Cats and gorillas. Some people sure are excited. Well, congratulations to you, and let me offer my personal opinion that the arguments opposing you were very weak. Good luck! Cullen328Let's discuss it18:14, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Request For Administration Nomination
Hello Galobtter, could you please nominate me to be an admin on Wikipedia as i have been seeing many vandalism and wish to ban these accounts which do so. So please do nominate me and i will coorporate as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theamazinnghelloworld (talk • contribs) 05:24, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Request for article approval due to admin vandalism
Hello Galobtter. I have seen that you are an amazing administrator and contributor on Wikipedia so I feel that I can trst you on this. Earlier this week I created an article Draft:John Kavinraj Philip, and submitted it for review. It came back but i was expecting this. The admin that declined my article stated on my talk page saying I am a b**** by creating this article and having no help and useless towards wikipedia. I was very hurt and as an admin on Wikipedia that was not the attitude i was hoping. I have seen that you are great at your job so thats why I came seeking help from you. Could you please personally review my article as you are a great administrator to trust and i supose the best yet. My sources come from books, magazines, newspaper articles and booklets. Please do consider it so that I can continue my passion on contributing on Wiki. Thank you so much Galobtter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theamazinnghelloworld (talk • contribs) 09:10, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Hello Galobtter. I am sory but I think you were mistaken as I am not being paid to edit nor create this article but to be honest i spent 3 moths researching on this and recently got my Wiki account to have this article created. Please do advice is my reference not enough because i think it is good enough because I have books, magazines and newspaper articles to refer back as source. Please do consider my article and i will update and put in more sources if requested but my prayer is for it to be created and accepted to be an article. I dont want my work to go to waste because of that admin. So i want your help and please do help me Sir Galobtter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theamazinnghelloworld (talk • contribs) 09:37, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Hello Galobtter, its ok, cuase that guy that admin that said bad words to me deleted my article. He called me a f**ker this time. I was really pissed o him condemming my article. So Galobtter, while I am creating my article again (I copy pasted it incase of an emergency) so could you tell me if my sources were not up to standards or what. You name it I will fix it ad please do upon God I am begging you to help me because many admins have never helped me when I asked for advice in the live forums and talk pages none of them helped me but. Please do help me out.I will listen to you all the way and follow your instructions. Please do i am begging you to help me and approve my article. What am i lacking just name it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theamazinnghelloworld (talk • contribs) 10:06, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Theamazinnghelloworld, Stop lying about other people - nobody called you a f**ker - if you recreate the article and it is not substantially less promotional it will just get deleted again and you'd likely be blocked for continued promotional editing. Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:11, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
I am sorry Galobtter, thank you for reviewing Nas Daily Corporation page. That was not the page where the incident happenened. It happened on my first article John Kavinraj Philip. He is a great person and i researched him for 3 months and I was quite mad when the=at admin said that to me. Then later a guy named Deb deleted the draft so I dont have the history record. Thank yu for at least answering me and I am trully thankfull. Due to no admins answer me but your really and awsome Wikipedia. Is it ok if I recreate my old article that got deleted and you review it and give me your advice? I am willing for any type of advice from you as an admin.
TheamazinnghelloworldThis accusation didn't happen either, and I have checked every single edit related to the deleted article of John Kavinraj Philip. You've been asked to stop lying, and immediately return to doing so. How about taking some time off from article creation and read up on some of the information available on reliable sources and also promotional editing. If you continue disrupting Wikipedia by accusing others of wrong when they're not doing anything even close to resembling what you are saying you'll be blocked from editing to avoid wasting the time of administrators with false accusations. -- Longhair\talk10:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Welcome to the mop cupboard btw. When somebody is grovelling and piling on praise, they want something (if they're new here anyway) :D -- Longhair\talk10:48, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Personally, I wouldn't unblock. Your decision is well-justified, and I'm only offering a view in case well-meaning interference has made you feel that you have been too severe... Deb (talk) 13:06, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
And every time I assume good faith, I end up looking like an idiot. Can we change that AGF to ABF or something, you know, just for efficiency? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:14, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Still good to have someone thinking about AGF, though yeah, one bad thing about AGF is that it makes you look stupid if the editor does turn out to be bad/malicious :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:18, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Galobtter looking confused as to what the d-batch button does....
Hello Galobtter. I am pleased to report that I have closed your RFA as successful. Good luck with the new tools, and feel free to stop by my talk page anytime if you have any questions. Cheers, 28bytes (talk) 12:39, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Congratulations! I'm still surprised by the number of oppose !votes at your RfA that did not make any sense at all and mentioned nothing about why you would actually use the admin tools improperly... but I guess that's just how RfA is and fortunately you passed anyways. --SkyGazer 512Oh no, what did I do this time?14:58, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
I'm late to the party (time zones), but congratulations! You did yourself (and us) proud, and I look forward to seeing you around WP in your new T-shirt! (What's the matter with this crowd, that nobody gave you your T-shirt yet! Didn't know your size?) -- MelanieN (talk) 17:26, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Okay, G, now the thing to remember is that you're still a "volunteer" editor, so don't take any guff off nobody! Well, lotsa luck with that. May your tenure be long, fruitful and filled with happy days!Paine Ellsworth, ed. put'r there22:38, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Delighted to see this--the project's lucky to have you. Thank you for standing, and for all your contributions, past and future! Innisfree987 (talk) 01:16, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
I am slightly late to the party, but just wanted to drop by and congratulate you on the passing of your RfA. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop by. I am usually always around to lend a hand. --TheSandDoctorTalk07:29, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Congratulations! Out of curiosity, how do you pronounce your username? In my head, I’ve been saying “gallow butter” but it struck me that this is probably incorrect. Mz7 (talk) 00:59, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Mz7, Ha! No, though now that I think about it that pronunciation does make some sense. SkyGazer 512 is closer, but the way I pronounce it in my head is ga-laub-tuhr where the ga is pronounced like the first syllable of "gander" (ɡæ). Galobtter (pingó mió) 03:53, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Hey, now that you are an admin (congrats on that!) you might be able to help me.
I am doing maintenance on Arrowverse characters and while trying to create Category:Arrowverse characters, I've noticed that it is protected. Looking at the deletion discussion linked there, it seems that either the rational was flawed at the time, or that the situation has changed which would now allow the category to be created.
Gonnym, TBH, I really don't deal with categories that much and wouldn't know if creating the category would be appropriate or not; and anyways, you'd want to ask the protecting admin (ping CactusWriter) first to see if they'd be willing to allow recreation. Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:37, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
No problem, I'll ask him (first time I ever needed to do this and the page itself doesn't really say who to contact other than "administrators"). --Gonnym (talk) 15:39, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
welcome to the mop corps
Congratulations on your successful RFA! I'm a little late, but that won't stop me from torturing you passing on what the puppy told me after my RFA passed – eleven long, sordid, hasn't-Katie-gone-away-yet years ago:
Remember you will always protect the wrong version. (I got nothing here. It's inevitable. I'd be shocked if you haven't done it already.)
Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. Without exception, you will pick the wrong one to do. (See #5.)
Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll. (You'll attract many more of those now, because mop. They must like to drink the dirty water in the bucket.)
Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block, because really, what else is there to live for?
Remember that when you make these errors, someone will be more than happy to point them out to you in dazzling clarity and descriptive terminology. It will not be a personal attack because we are admins and, therefore, we are all rouge anyway.
Finally, remember to contact me if you ever need assistance, and I will do what I am able.
DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales, because if it did, it would be much, much better. All rights released under GFDL.
Short for global, indicating global knowledge and your interest in global warming. Did I get away with that? Are they smiling? O3000 (talk) 13:57, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
If they need suppressed so they don’t show up in drop downs, it’s usually best to contact a steward directly or go to #wikimedia-stewardsconnect and request a steward to suppress it globally. Because of SUL, it’s really a global issue (and if it really shouldn’t show up in drop downs, be sure to request suppression and not lock-hide.) TonyBallioni (talk) 15:04, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
...so I'll try to be gentle, but this AfD close [4] is completely off the mark. You said, "article meets WP:GNG based on the provided sources and so merits a stand-alone article", but that logic doesn't track. Usually at AfD the question is notability, but not this one. The question here is WP:NOPAGE which deals with the question of whether a subject, assumed to be notable, should nonetheless be covered jointly with other subjects on a shared page. The arguments presented on that question, not on notability, are what you should be evaluating. EEng21:48, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Those arguing for keep argued there was enough information for a separate article and for the "presumption" of suitability for a stand-alone article that WP:GNG gives; those are reasonable arguments, and were made by the "predominant number of responsible Wikipedians".
Not only that, to present a WP:NOPAGE argument, those arguing for delete would need to at the very least point out what "shared page" the person would be covered in; no one arguing for delete did. Galobtter (pingó mió) 04:50, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Hmmm. Odd that you refer to "the predominant number of responsible Wikipedians", linking that phrase to WP:CLOSE, which explicitly warns "Consensus is not determined by counting heads". I guess we'll just have to renominate specifying a specific target page. EEng16:55, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
I was referring to the bulk of it which talks about "If the discussion shows that some people think one policy is controlling, and some another, the closer is expected to close by judging which view has the predominant number of responsible Wikipedians supporting it, not personally select which is the better policy." Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:57, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
You're right, sorry my search for that phrase in CLOSE didn't find it somehow. Nonetheless I still think it's off the mark. It's not a question of which of GNG or NOPAGE controls, because they are two steps of a single decision process presented on the same page -- not uncoordinated, policies or guidelines found on disconnected pages directing conflicting things. Most participants in the discussion insisted on speaking only to the first part of the process -- GNG -- and ignoring the second part -- PAGEDECIDE aka NOPAGE. Anyway, thanks for your replies. EEng17:06, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Please be more specific on the talk page on what was promotional editing and copyright violations? I listed out on the talk page the edits I am proposing. Thank you. Melizdean (talk) 05:49, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
Our survey should take about 10-15 minutes of your time. We hope that you will enjoy it and find the questions interesting. All answers will be kept strictly confidential and will be anonymized before the aggregate results are published. Regretfully, we can only accept responses from people who live in the US due to restrictions in our grant-based funding.
As a reward for your participation, we will randomly pick 1 out of every 5 participants and give them $25 worth of goods of their choice from the Wikipedia store (e.g. Wikipedia themed t-shirts). Note that we can only reward you if you are based in the US.
I nominated [5]Nobember at list of redirects for discussion a few days ago and the result of this was delete. However, I noticed that the redirect hasn't been deleted yet and is still there? I also don't understand why the discussion was closed so quickly, I thought that maybe it could be relisted due to a lack of consensus but that's just my humble opinion. CycloneYoristalk!05:53, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to Onel5969. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.
Thanks are also extended for their work to JTtheOG (15,059 reviews), Boleyn (12,760reviews), Cwmhiraeth (9,001reviews), Semmendinger (8,440reviews), PRehse (8,092reviews), Arthistorian1977 (5,306reviews), Abishe (4,153 reviews), Barkeep49 (4,016reviews), and Elmidae (3,615reviews). Cwmhiraeth, Semmendinger, Barkeep49, and Elmidae have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only sevenmonths, while Boleyn, with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.
The backlog is now approaching 5,000, and still rising. There are around 640holders of the NPR flag, most of whom appear to be inactive. The 10% of the reviewers who do 90% of the work could do with some support especially as some of them are now taking a well deserved break.
Really good news - NPR wins the Community Wishlist Survey 2019
At #1 position, the Community Wishlist poll closed on 3December with a resounding success for NPP, reminding the WMF and the volunteer communities just how critical NPP is to maintaining a clean encyclopedia and the need for improved tools to do it. A big 'thank you' to everyone who supported the NPP proposals. See the results.
Training video
Due to a number of changes having been made to the feed since this three-minutevideo was created, we have been asked by the WMF for feedback on the video with a view to getting it brought up to date to reflect the new features of the system. Please leave your comments here, particularly mentioning how helpful you find it for new reviewers.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here.
Hello, I wish to create a new draft for "Leonid Afremov" in my own words, no copy/paste from other websites. Just one or two short paragraphs. Is the article now banned for creation? I'm reading the following: protected Leonid Afremov [Create=Require extended confirmed access] (indefinite)... Thank you for your answer. Scm5791 (talk) 20:55, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
Shocked!
I went to look for some tasks earlier and came across 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami at an "articles that need copy edits" page. I took a crack at the first two paras. and realized none of it had inline cites. WHAT A DOG! And to think it was once an FA, now merely "B". It needs to get some citations for what we both know might be fact, but that's not good enough.
It's not finding cites which is the difficulty now... It's finding cites that match the material as presented....Not a big deal, one or two suitable news sources covered that story. I'll stand by my editing so far there though, as far as prose. Those lede paras were a mess, stylistically. Quick question... Are "The Guardian" or "The Mail" suitable sources? They both seem kind of straddling a line between a blog and a news outlet. Regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 15:17, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
The Guardian is a major mainstream newspaper (so WP:NEWSORG applies); just make sure you're citing the news section and not opinion. If by The Mail you mean the Daily Mail, then no. I'd suggest looking in Google Books for sourcing and see if you can find higher quality sources than newspapers reporting on the day. Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:25, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Galobtter, as you seem to know your way around complicated copyright violation issues, I'm here to ask if you can help Artlover06 (talk), whose edits turned a low-key and fairly encyclopedic page written by someone else into a WP:CSD#G11 and WP:CSD#G12-worthy speedy deletion (spamvio? MER-C and I should write a page on that). One suggestion off the top of my head when Artlover06 posted on my talk page for rescue was that the previous non-copyvio revisions could be restored. I don't work in revision-deletion territory, though, and it seems that you do. – Athaenara ✉ 08:05, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Athaenara, Done. Yeah, when there are previous non-copyvio versions it should be reverted to that version and revdelled instead of G12ed; in this case, Kdv06 added a bunch of copyright violations too so 🤷♂️.
Thank you for your help in editing this article. I am going to go ahead and edit this article from here. As I said I am writing a research paper in school about this artist and will have much more credible and self written information on him. Not sure about the language you are using to describe additional issues- please be of help and advise me on how to resolve any outstanding issues. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artlover06 (talk • contribs) 17:59, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Hello Galobtter ,
Early in A Child's Christmas in Wales the young Dylan and his friend Jim Prothero witness smoke pouring from Jim's home. After the conflagration has been extinguished Dylan writes that
Nobody could have had a noisier Christmas Eve. And when the firemen turned off the hose and were standing in the wet, smoky room, Jim's Aunt, Miss. Prothero, came downstairs and peered in at them. Jim and I waited, very quietly, to hear what she would say to them. She said the right thing, always. She looked at the three tall firemen in their shining helmets, standing among the smoke and cinders and dissolving snowballs, and she said, "Would you like anything to read?"
My thanks to you for your efforts to keep the 'pedia readable in case the firemen chose one of our articles :-) Best wishes to you and yours and happy editing in 2019. MarnetteD|Talk22:32, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Category creation protection, part 2
Hey, so CactusWriter (the admin which blocked the creation of the category) hasn't been online since the 5th. Where would be the correct venue to ask for a review of this block? --Gonnym (talk) 19:29, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
That could work, but would be a sub-optimal title. The reason the MCU editors choose that title was, I'm assuming, since other editors were adding the comic character articles to that title and they wanted it made clear that it was for MCU-only articles. However, that happened because said editors were also blocking the creation of new articles on the basis that the comic book articles already exist. This has been recently challenged with 2 new MCU creations. This was also somewhat of an issue with the Arrowverse but there have been several new articles created recently. Also, per WP:CONSISTENCY with 99.9% other character categories out there, we never use "specific" in the title (except the MCU one), so for example, The Flash (2014 TV series), does not have a category named Category:The Flash (2014 TV series) specific characters, for which an argument can be made that other editors would mistakenly be adding comic book articles to it. Also, Category:Arrowverse character redirects to lists exists so that would need to be also changed, which would mean dozen of pointless edits. So to sum it up, it could work, but there is absolutely no reason not to use the standard title. --Gonnym (talk) 11:14, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Just an FYI, you don't need to go to trial to be "convicted" of a crime. If you plead guilty and are sentenced then you've been convicted too. R2 (bleep) 08:42, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
Noël ~ καλά Χριστούγεννα ~ З Калядамі ~ חנוכה שמח ~ Gott nytt år!
Quick question re reviews
Hello there, you were recently friendly and helpful on my talk page and told me I could ask you for help... the time has come! A ref error just now alerted me to the fact that a new user has been adding music reviews to pages such as Fragile (Yes album) sourced to "Sea of Tranquility." Wiki doesn't have an article for that source (though it is mentioned on the disambiguation page as being a music webzine).
This seems odd to me, as I *think* that box is reserved for reviews from notable sources. It seems as if opening it up to any old review from any old zine would be asking for trouble/clutter. But I don't know for sure, and wanted to run this past someone. Am I off base here?
Also, it's a holiday week and this could not possibly be lower-priority, so please take your time getting back to me, if ever. Thanks for your time, and Merry Christmas, if Christmas is a thing in your life! Best, Jessicapierce (talk) 02:37, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
Jessicapierce, One useful tip regarding subject specific questions is that the relevant WikiProject usually has useful information on the subject, and one can ask on the talk page of the project. So in this case it'd be the Album WikiProject. "Sea of Tranquility" would have to be a reliable source to be considered for inclusion in the box; per the WikiProject guide WP:NOTRSMUSIC, Sea of Tranquility is not a reliable source and so should be removed from the article entirely. And in general, there's some advice on the Album ratings box: "When choosing which reviews to include, consider the notability of the review source and keeping a neutral point of view." Galobtter (pingó mió) 04:51, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
Hello Galobtter, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Happy editing, 7&6=thirteen (☎)16:18, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi Galobtter, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas, and a very Happy and Prosperous New Year! May 2019 be prosperous and joyful...... Thanks for all your help and your contributions to the 'pedia
Hi Galobtter, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy and Prosperous New Year, Thanks for all your help and thanks for all your contributions to the 'pedia,
Hi there, would you please take a look at the editor AnnaEPAAS, a paid editor, who writes mostly for our Environmental Protection Agency article but other sites related to the EPA as well. As you will see on her user page, she says that she works for the "EPA Alumni Association" which I did try to research and ended up with more questions than answers. Maybe it's just me but I find her user page a little misleading...
BTW, some years ago I ran into a few problems at the Clothianidin article when user:USEPA James, an EPA employee, attempted to whitewash that article. It was back in 2011 and perhaps they were not yet so concerned about paid edits back then. I am not suggesting that Anna is attempting to bias the EPA article, but she has made so many edits that it could be said that she has close to ghost written it--that charge was made a few years back when it was learned that a paid editor had added numerous edits to the BP article even though it was just basic stuff.
Hey, I was wondering if you could help me figure out this issue. Queen Radio (Nicki Minaj)'s history says it was created yesterday, but I remember seeing it a while ago when it was also tagged with AfD, but I can't find anything about that. Do you have a way to check this or maybe it's just my memory messing with me? --Gonnym (talk) 00:02, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Gonnym, if an article at that title was deleted, a record will definitely be at the deletion log and apart from seeing the deleted edits I don't have as an admin any special way of knowing that there were past versions of the article. In this case, as pointed out in this diff, the article was at another title. Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:54, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
You recently put back what I had updated on Soundwalk collectives page, but the intro has not been put back to my update, can I update it again without it being reverted like last time, or was there something in it that you thought inappropriate?
Sonnenalle44, Hi, I specifically reverted the intro to an older version because I found the lead at this revision to be clearly promotional. Feel free to update the lead in a non-promotional manner but I would say that you shouldn't revert to the previous lead due to the promotional aspect. Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:03, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi Galobtter, Greeting to you. Just a quick question. My understanding is that public domain document is exemption of copyright protection. copyright violation is against the law but plagiarism is not abide by law but a moral/ethical violation. So if an article in Wikipedia copy word by word for more than 50% of the text from public domain, that would be accepted in Wikipedia and not need for CSD nomination? Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk)13:37, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
CASSIOPEIA, Yes, if an article is copied from a public domain source, there is no need to delete it; one usually adds {{PD-notice}} or a similar template as a courtesy. An additional note: the standard for WP:G12 is not "more than 50%" from a copyrighted source but that basically all the text is a copyright violation. Where less is a copyright violation one'd usually remove the copyright violating text and ask for {{revdel}} of the revisions with copyright violations. Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:50, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
notability independent of the album??,But frank ocean had the Blonded radio page,the radio show was to promote his Music.WIKIZILE (talk) 10:29, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Unfortunately no, since consensus at the discussion was for merging and against a stand-alone article. That other articles haven't been merged does not mean that this one shouldn't be. Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:10, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Shouldn't this template and a batch of other Asian Games templates you closed as "delete" be substituted rather than orphaned as they have quite a few transclusions and as they are navboxes; wouldn't it be better to substitute them? Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:14, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Hey, I was wondering if you might reconsider logging things like this. As I understand it, the logging is only required for discretionary sanctions that a single admin wouldn't be ordinarily be able to place outside the topic area. So you're required to log special page restrictions or topic bans, but not ordinary page protections and blocks. The only effect of logging something like a page protection is to make it so no other admin is allowed to reduce the protection level for any reason without explicit permission from you. In my mind it makes more sense to just have it be a regular admin action that can be changed through normal process in the future if any change is needed. ~Awilley (talk)03:41, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Awilley, the way the WP:A/I/PIA restriction works, is that irregardless of whether an admin has actually applied protection, the restriction still applies. So unless the committee rescinds the remedy, there would be no point in removing the protections I applied anyhow. (also, per Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log/2018#Extended confirmed protections it is pretty normal to log this sort of thing; I just happened to be the first this year). Additionally, in the process of applying ECP I also added the 1RR page restriction template, since they go hand-in-hand.
I suppose I could technically do the protections not as "Arbitration enforcement", but considering they are arbitration enforcement..it would just confuse things in my view. Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:41, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
I see now. I didn't realize they had actually passed a 500/30 remedy. I suppose the logging doesn't matter either way. ~Awilley (talk)13:43, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Big Brother housemates sandbox use?
Hey Galobtter I'm just wanting to make sure I'm doing this right. I reviewed all of the what links here for {{Big Brother housemates}} and found most are just normal mentions in discussions that should not be changed. I removed the template from this draft, this sandbox and from this user page. I also tagged several sandboxes and user page under CSD U5 as the template was being used for personal/webhosting purposes. The use of this template at Talk:Big Brother Canada (season 3) is part of edit requests that are archived. Should I edit archived requests to remove the template? Also should I remove it from Template talk:Big Brother endgame even though this template will be deleted later on down the road? Sorry if I'm being a pest here just unsure about some things. Thanks for the help! Alucard 16❯❯❯ chat?10:41, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
It is only one editor, so what should be done is discussing with them and blocking if necessary, and how do you know it is original research and not simply unsourced content? Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:44, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Deleted template refund to user space
Hi Galbtter, I was wondering if I could ask for two deleted templates to be moved to my user space for tinkering? They are {{Anatomists}} and {{Anatomy resources}}. I won't be redeploying these templates into main space without building consensus first. --Tom (LT) (talk) 02:22, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
Many apologies for the unintended removal of the block notice. It was neither intended, not did I have any intention of changing anything. I try to avoid mobile devices because of the risk of fat-finger syndrome. I will stick to conventional keyboards as much as possible in future. Apologies again. VelellaVelella Talk 09:47, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
You don't even need to ask, I'm certain I'll do more of my own accord from idiocy. This and #Trouted below basically represent "let me just slam that script button" and everything will work out just fine. Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:58, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed you declined my report. No I don't think you would be blocked for using this username on other sites. But what Shubham 7787 is doing is using Wikipedia to advertise social media accounts. A 10 fireplaneImform me19:48, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
A 10 fireplane, no part of their username violates the username policy, and using wikipedia to advertise social media accounts is a problem with their edits rather than with their username. They aren't even linking to their other social media accounts so they aren't doing too much advertising either. Galobtter (pingó mió) 03:30, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
User:Eleanor De Cruzem is engaging in sockpuppetry and he's the sock-puppet of all those Users which were blocked in a Admins RfA election (not going to get disclosed for obvious reasons).. If possible please delete all Yeh revisions and block all the sock-puppets.. Too much for now, something has to be done regarding this.. I find this really insulting. Please do something as you know everything about it and it's quite obvious (by his contributions).. I think it is a Long term abuse case.. But I can't connect it properly, can't connect the dots.. But it started from that (not to be disclosed) RfA to target a specific User (not to be disclosed).. Just do something for God's sake! 182.58.167.124 (talk) 16:00, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
In this edit, perhaps you meant to say "rollback editors evading their ban"? Thanks for your response that clarified your intent for the proposed principle. isaacl (talk) 16:33, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
If you've had the pleasure of looking through ABBAlover11011's talk page as of now, you and I are apparently bots. May your SSD fail in the coming weeks, there can only be one :) Kb03 (talk) 18:39, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi Galobtter, Good day. Need help here. I create a template for my user talk page edit notice. I need the pop up screen when an editor click the edit button and dont know how to do that. Can you help? My edit notice template is HERE. Thanks in advance. CASSIOPEIA(talk)04:01, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
Of course you realize that I agree with this redirect. I just thought there should be some kind of documentation of what was done, rather than having it simply disappear without a trace. After we get a couple more agreements I will put a note on the RRB talk page, pointing to the discussion on the talk page of the target article. -- MelanieN (talk) 18:34, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
MelanieN, Starting the discussion was a good idea :) - and I don't expect Annmorgan24 to give up very easily on creating a stand-alone article and a discussion and consensus to do so should hopefully stave off further attempts there. Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:48, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
Exactly. If she repeatedly restores it against consensus, we would have justification to ask for protection. She is a WP:SPA whose entire oeuvre here is about Broidy - always negative. I haven't challenged her on it but there may be some kind of COI there. Since there are several of us watching, I think we can keep it under control. Some of her input is salvageable. -- MelanieN (talk) 18:53, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
"Unless the username is an egregious violation of policy"
Hi, G. I don't agree with telling people they should hold off reporting new usernames like "Poopymaster666" or "Longschlong17" at UAA. Nothing wrong with blocking them, since they are egregious violation of policy IMO. So I blocked. Bishonen | talk19:47, 11 January 2019 (UTC).
Bishonen, I think if people did indeed report every blockable violation of the username policy (and while clear, those are pretty run-of-the-mill violations IMO) from the account creation logs UAA would be backlogged to insanity. Of course, there's nothing wrong with blocking once the report is there, just that in my view people should be discouraged from reporting those things, because it takes less time to block the one user that edits once they do than blocking the 10 that don't. Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:02, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
Ronz Oops - I was restoring an old version of the article that had more content that was removed some time ago when someone tried to insert their autobiography in the article - I didn't notice that I was restoring thefamousepeople.com and definitely don't think thefamouspeople.com is reliable in any way. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:04, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
Block clashing fun
Hi Galobtter! I accidentally overwrote the block you just applied to 89.160.125.162 with the block I applied at the same time you did. I restored the block duration that you set and removed my duplicate block notice; sorry for bumping into you like that.... ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)08:05, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
No worries, happens, and that vandal was acting pretty weirdly - both vandalizing and restoring the correct version while pretending not to be the vandal... Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:09, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
I figured you'd understand, but I wanted to message you anyways and let you know - thanks. I see that kind of editing occasionally when I patrol. They're not familiar with how things work here at all; they usually do that because they think that making edits on top of edits from the same user will somehow bury their vandalism, or that their following edits will appear to others that he's "fixing the vandalism" but instead changing it to the wrong information. *shrug* :-) ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)08:13, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
Talk page
Supp man. I've got a question. What do you do if there's a Wikipedian who create a discussion page by adding just {{Template:Talk header}} but there were no discussion on the page? Should it be deleted? If it is, which criteria does it met? Thank you for responding. CyberTroopers (talk) 14:59, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi Thanks for your help [8], can you please point me to the relevant page that says cquote should not be used. I find this looks better for quotes, but I might not be aware of the policy regarding the cquote, so I thought it is better to ask. regards. --DBigXrayᗙ18:51, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the links, so It seems that cquote is allowed to be used for short quotes. and "quote" should be used for longer "block quotes". (Longer means "more than about 40 words or a few hundred characters, or consisting of more than one paragraph"). Do you concur with this ? if not please correct me. thanks. --DBigXrayᗙ19:02, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
The usage of cquote in the article was as for a block quote; shorter quotes should be inline. Cquote itself makes a quote into a block so I don't see how one could use it for shorter quotes not as a block. Galobtter (pingó mió) 19:26, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Ok, how about cquote usage here fair ? Note: I did change the cquote into quote for the award citation from the article after this discussion, but i am curious to hear your opinion on other cquotes on that page. --DBigXrayᗙ20:52, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
I have been getting really into the idea of doing research and making wikipedia pages. I have done a substantial amount of research on someone who deserves a wikipedia page, I am worried that if I upload it an editor will delete it for a reason undiscussed. Can you help me work out if it is wiki ready? If so, how do I go about showing you what I have created? I have compared it to a lot of other pages and it looks consistent and all facts are backed up with references.
Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonnenalle44 (talk • contribs) 13:06, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi! Welcome to the new reply-link newsletter, which I made because the ol' list on the reply-link talk page was unwieldy. In case you haven't been following development recently, I've sent out some new updates that should let it reply basically anywhere, even in transcluded pages or under hatted discussions (two locations people have been wanting for a while). Reliability has also gone way up, as I've implemented a couple of sanity checks that help prevent the script from responding to the wrong message. Unfortunately, that means the script fails a bit more often. Anyway, try it out if you haven't done so in a while, and let me know what you think! I always appreciate feature requests or bug reports on the talk page. Happy replying! (Signup list/Unsubscribe) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:23, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Ah, thanks! Staring at the diff alone I couldn't for the life of me figure out what you were up to. Thanks for explaining. --Xover (talk) 16:58, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
.jpeg)
