This is an archive of past discussions with User:RedactedHumanoid. 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.
Hello, RedactedHumanoid! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Peter Bellinger, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
Please stop linking common words, names of well known countries and cities etc. Links should only be used to help readers understand an article. Just because there is a separate article relating to a word is not sufficient reason to link it. Please see policy on linking: MOS:OVERLINK
Hello RedactedHumanoid, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.
While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Pete Glidewell, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pete Glidewell.
Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.
If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Vanderwaalforces}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
@Vanderwaalforces: I see. Can you please elaborate on why it you do not think that it may be suitable for inclusion in wikipedia in its current form, and furthermore, what can I do to try to make said article suitable for inclusion?
Hi there. I would just be repeating what I already said at the AfD page. A politician is not automatically notable because they contested in an election (which the lost). They have to win the seat, and the seat has to be a notable one (either on a federal or state level) before they can be considered notable by all means. Glidewell did win the election he contested in, and he also does not meet the general notability guidelines, which makes him non-notable. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:41, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for that. Do i need to follow those guidelines for creating a page about any politician, whether they are, say, a president, or a just a lowly mayor? I ask since I am currently working on a page about the mayor of Poulsbo. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 23:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, you know, WP:NPOL for example is a specific notability guideline (obviously because it applies to only politicians), so any article on a politician would first be judged in line with these guidelines, and if they do not pass, would now be judged in line with another specific notability guideline depending on the subject in question. Let's say a subject is a politician, academic and published author, the subject would first be judged based on WP:NPOL (for politicians), WP:NACADEMIC for anyone in an academic field, and WP:NAUTHOR for authors. If they fails to pass any of these SNGs, the would now be judged generally, say based on WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO.
Articles on mayors are mostly nominated for deletion when the city/town in question does not have much population to make their mayors to be presumptively notable, see WP:POLOUTCOMES for more details, especially the Mayor part. Poulsbo has small population compared to, say Manchester, which is way bigger (also population-wise) and yet the mayors of Manchester are not automatically notable for just being mayors. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 00:10, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
The article says she's the first African American and the first South Asian American in some office. Which is it? Her parents seem to make it the latter. 96.234.119.40 (talk) 03:33, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
Hello RedactedHumanoid and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.
A few features that you might find helpful:
Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
The project Academy has lots of useful information about editing and writing military history articles. One very useful introductory course to get you started is Writing a good stub.
In an edit to Michael Giacchino,
I noticed that you changed U.S. to United States because some people might not know that "U.S." stands for United States. I think that you may get some resistance or reversions on changing this commonly used abbreviation, particularly in infoboxes where space is at a premium.
Thanks for your contributions to Gobryas (son of Darius I). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability.
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
@RedactedHumanoid: Geni is considered an unreliable source because it's user generated content, and, frankly in my experience using it, often wrong and based on guess work. Geni and other user generated content sites should not be used as references. The first source is good and contributes towards notability though. Second probably does as well, but this isn't my particular area of expertise. Hey man im josh (talk) 10:37, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Hello RedactedHumanoid! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Why are articles and redirects with characters outside the Basic Multilingual Plane salted, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.
yes, the delivery was indeed strange. Still, I have made some changes to the code, it should not deliver the message to you again. —usernamekiran (talk)05:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
Nominations now open for the WikiProject Military history newcomer of the year and military historian of the year
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed 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.
Real quick, regarding your edit to Diocletian—when a GA or FA is missing a basic piece of information—e.g. the precise date of birth in a biography—there's probably a good reason for that, and you should double- or triple-check to make sure you're not introducing errors. Remsense ‥ 论09:55, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
I will do my best, but Cherokee is a language that only a couple thousand people still speak, so my capability to create an article about Facebook may be a bit limited. Will do my best though. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 08:01, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Sorry about this, but the Cherokee translator that I have typically relied on no longer seems to be working. I think, at least for the time being, this is an idea that I'll have to shelve, but I will consider creating one in the future if I find more resources to help me in doing so. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 08:35, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
@RedactedHumanoid However, try to find a native Cherokee speaker which edits the Cherokee Wiki and ask him to create this article for Facebook on this Wiki. As I want to be created as soon as possible. Or find a way to create it, by another translator or a person which can translate it for you. Thanks 188.172.111.113 (talk) 08:33, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello RedactedHumanoid, 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 heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, Abishe (talk) 23:53, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm sorry you're having a bad time. You make a lot of good edits. If I saw one I disagreed with, I undid it, sometimes being wrong myself or with my intent communicated imperfectly, but like I did with anyone else on here. At no point have I assumed bad faith in your edits—really, I feel I have to make it clear that I don't think I've given you any reason to believe I take your edits in bad faith, either. I don't think it would be productive for me to act as if I was in the wrong for having the editorial instincts I do. Undoing changes I disagree with isn't bad faith; if anything, I generally trusted you to understand my intent even if you disagreed. I regret that I wasn't quite able to make you at ease with my intentions.
That said, I do understand it's not exactly fun to be reverted, but I didn't see anything particularly fraught in it either. When one makes many technical or particularized edits, not all of them are going to be uncontroversial, I thought I was engaging with that dynamic in a healthy way with mutual understanding, since all we both want is to make the encyclopedia better.
I know you're frustrated and given that I'm not sure what else would be helpful to say but the truth here. The truth is, I hope you feel you can return at some point, since this really does seem like a misunderstanding it would be worth sorting out and we'll miss you. I did think posting this was worth a shot, so if you do quietly delete it as promised, I hope it comes across that I at least tried to reach out in good faith. Remsense ‥ 论07:16, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
Well, I appreciate the message. As usual, I think most of the stuff was just me saying things in the moment (thats what having a short temper and being very sensitive gets me). In the future I'll keep in mind that we both have the encyclopædia's best interests in mind, and that you reverting my edits isn't something I should take personally. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 20:59, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
I see you added back in the episode list for the page on RHLSTP. Shouldn't this be deleted to comply with User:Soetermans decision on the corresponding page for the Off Menu podcast that podcast episode lists are ephemera/trivia? 71.63.182.32 (talk) 00:34, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
To be fair, the part of the article in question is not an episode guide, as is discussed about in the discussion you have pointed to, merely a list of articles. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 00:40, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Is that substantially different between the two articles?
Basically I'm just wondering why there is an asymmetric standard for podcast episode recording being applied across wiki, especially given how adjacent the two articles in question are. 71.63.182.32 (talk) 00:42, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Oh, I see. I've looked over the two articles briefly, and I'd say that given they are both about podcasts, I think it would be plausible to remove the list of podcast episodes or whatever it is from the article about RHLSTP. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 00:46, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
New page reviewer granted
Hi RedactedHumanoid, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.
This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:
Thanks for your contributions to Botswana Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To Animals. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability.
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Alright. One question though: if it needs to be converted to a draft for now because it needs more sources, why was it reviewed without question some time back? Just curious. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 03:59, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi there, and thank you for your help with NPP! I noticed that you recently marked Kiuoro as reviewed without adding any maintenance tags. However, at the time of review, it was sourced solely by primary sources, meaning it did not clearly meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines.
Reviewing new pages is definitely a learned skill, and we all make mistakes! As you're honing your skills, I recommend keeping the NPP Flowchart close. I'm pretty sure I followed the flowchart religiously for months before feeling more confident in my ability to review. Additionally, if you don't do so already, I recommend looking through WP:NPPSORT, where you'll find a list of new articles sorted by topic. I find this helpful for a) focusing on article types I'm more familiar with and b) getting more comfortable with different subject notability guidelines, including which sources are frequently used, as well as those that are less acceptable (see also WP:RSP). For the latter, you may also find it useful to install User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter.js.
Alright, thanks for letting me know. I'll look over the NPP flowchart and will check out NPPSORT. I'll be a bit more careful in the future about making sure the sources are reliable/aren't entirely made up of primary sources. Have a nice day. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 19:50, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
Upcoming expiry of your patroller right
Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your permission "patroller" (New page reviewers) will expire on 00:00, 8 February 2025 (UTC). For most rights, you will need to renew at WP:PERM, unless you have been told otherwise when your right was approved. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion.Leaderbot (talk) 19:42, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Hello there, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! I wanted to let you know that I have declined your G1 speedy deletion nomination of Chiqui Chiqui because the article does not meet the G1 speedy deletion criteria. G1 only "applies to pages consisting entirely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history". However, I have deleted the article under G12 because it is created entirely from copyrighted material. Please let me know if you have any follow up questions regarding this deletion. Take care, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 19:27, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Yeah the article (to me at least) didn't sound all that coherent/encyclopaedic, but I see that G12 is definitely more appropriate here. Thanks for letting me know. Have a good day. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 19:31, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
New page reviewer granted
Hi RedactedHumanoid, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.
This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:
It's now indefinite (congrats). The permission is however removed after extended periods of inactivity as a security precaution, but can typically be re-conferred without issue in those cases once you're back. Regarding NGEO, the specific issue with the series of articles I pointed out is that they're about neighborhoods, not stand-alone places like a village or city that has distinct legal recognition; if they meet GNG they should get an article, but if they don't there's likely a better page to merge that information to. signed, Rosguilltalk20:42, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
Yep, although villages/settlements without legal recognition (a nebulous concept itself) are a point of some disagreement and interpretation (although they're also relatively rare). There's also historically been issues with people misinterpreting census documents in other languages and labeling things as villages when they were in fact post offices, intersections, etc. (off the top of my head this was particularly an issue for Iran and Russia, which would list the more-or-less random census collection dropoff sites in large, sparse rural regions in a way that made people confuse them for populated places) signed, Rosguilltalk21:23, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
Hello RedactedHumanoid! The thread you created at the Teahouse, No article about Barron Trump, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.
From patrolling new edits to uploading photos or joining a campaign, you can count on the Wikimedia platform to be up and running — in your language, anywhere in the world. That is, except for a couple of minutes during the equinoctes.
Hi. First of all, why exactly do you want me to create an article about Facebook on Cherokee Wikipedia? I have no objection to it I just wanna know. Secondly, is the image in question free to use? RedactedHumanoid (talk) 17:11, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
@RedactedHumanoid No, I don't know that user and I am not aware if he has made a similar request to you. I am making this request since I like Facebook as a social network and I have seen that you have edited pages on Cherokee Wiki. If you want, create it and use the logo I created myself by Facebook words in Cherokee. Thanks MongWedong (talk) 17:19, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
The Cherokee translator that I used to use seems to have been taken down, I can't write the article in English because obviously, and writing an article with just a couple words won't work. 😐 RedactedHumanoid (talk) 19:49, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
@RedactedHumanoid The article can be written with a few words. In addition, you can find another translator which translates accurately in Cherokee and you can create the article with longer words, if you want. Please create just this article for Facebook in Cherokee language. Nothing else! MongWedong (talk) 20:26, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
@RedactedHumanoid Ok. Thank you so much for accepting to create the article for Facebook on Cherokee Wiki. I just want to be an article for Facebook on this Wiki, like it is on Navajo Wiki. Thanks again. MongWedong (talk) 05:19, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
So thats what visually happens when talk page conversations get too long. Interesting. There's a little line that brings them back to the left side of the page. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 18:40, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
That's actually something my reply tool does when a certain level of indentation has been reached. It's a templateless implementation of the functionality provided by the more popular {{Outdent}} template which people typically insert manually when they feel a discussion is too indented. Side note: the article requester's account has been globally locked. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 21:51, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
Generally yes. If you have doubts, ask an admin to have a look at the situation. In this particular case, the user was WP:NOTHERE even if they hadn't been an LTA. I'm sorry I didn't request the lock myself through the designated channels. Thanks Praxidicae for picking up where I slacked off. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 14:53, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Alright. For the first issue, you need to cite secondary sources (and sometimes tertiary sources for larger articles) to back up the primary sources. Secondary sources are usually less connected (and thus at less of a risk of being biased) to the subject in question, so try to find some. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 19:24, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Hello! I'm a bit confused about your template of "no sources". Brandenberger–Vafa mechanism currently has five or do you mean inline citations? I could add them, but don't really think it's necessary given the short length. Everything I wrote can be directly found in the original paper and summed up in all others. I also don't consider it useful to go through them page by page for each sentence. So what do you mean in particular? Thanks for your help! Samuel Adrian Antz (talk) 23:08, 23 March 2025 (UTC)
Yes, but I asked why literature doesn't count as a source? It is quite common in shorter articles about mathematics and physics to reference its content with literature, for example Donaldson theory, Kronheimer–Mrowka basic class or Witten conjecture. (But I'm indeed not a fan when this happens with longer articles like Floer homology, which has one reference and lists around thirty books.)
And as said, I also don't think the improvement you want is actual improvement. I can add inline citation for every single sentence without a problem, but I don't consider a list of references going "Brandenberger & Vafa, page 396", "Brandenberger & Vafa, page 397" and "Brandenberger & Vafa, page 398" to be useful. So again, is that what you want? Samuel Adrian Antz (talk) 23:29, 23 March 2025 (UTC)
I've now added the inline citations I mentioned and removed your template.
Two final notes: It seems to me, because of your passive-aggressive "happy?", that you take my comments as personal critique. If that's the case, please don't. As said in my first comment, I'm thankful for the work you do here. Your template also isn't personal critique on me, is it? It is simply an issue we both try to solve, together. Also, it would be helpful for you to not just answer with generic one-liners. I know why you think the template is warranted, and I know how to use the citation tool. I contacted you for a more detailed insight into what you think is the problem.
Hi, I don't understand the past tense in the Hegseth article
I think we should clearly state that he is the current Secretary of Defense. As an analogy, does an older encyclopedia from the 1980s say Elizabeth "was" the Queen of England? I hope not! FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 19:40, 24 March 2025 (UTC)
It's workable. The phrase "has served” is a little bit labored, but is present tense once you look at it. I think it slows reading and is not as clear as " ... is the current ... "
I don't get your comment in the TNO disambiguation article
You added an invisible comment in the TNO (disambiguation) article stating that The New Order: Last Days of Europe, a popular Hearts of Iron IV mod, should not be included because an AfD discussion determined it did not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. However, that discussion only concluded that the mod did not have enough independent sources to justify its own article—it did not rule out mentioning it elsewhere on Wikipedia. In fact, the result was to redirect the article to Hearts of Iron IV, where the mod is briefly described.
Despite this, The New Order is referenced in multiple other Wikipedia articles, including the New Order (disambiguation) page and Hypothetical Axis Victory in World War II, where it is cited several times with reliable sources such as Wargamer. Given that the mod is widely known as "TNO" and many people searching for this disambiguation page are likely looking for it, wouldn't its inclusion here be appropriate? Could you clarify why it was removed from this page specifically, despite being referenced elsewhere? Juanix-2212 (talk) 06:07, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
First of all, thank you for reminding me that AfDs do not determine whether or not something is notable enough to appear on Wikipedia. I should note that, according to the page history, pretty much every time the mod was added to the disambiguation page, the addition was removed. I can reword the invisible comment if you'd like. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 17:01, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for the response! I've looked at the revision history of TNO, and it's pretty confusing. You're right that the mod has been constantly added and removed from the page, but I haven't been able to find any explanation. The Talk page of TNO is quite empty, and although there are some old (2021 and 2023) questions about whether the mod should be added or to what category it belongs, they didn't get a single response. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears as if editors have been adding and removing the mod from the page based on their personal opinion, and that there hasn't been any discussion to settle the issue.
Shouldn't there be a discussion about the mod instead of endlessly adding and removing it without much explanation? Again, thank you for responding, I don't know much about Wikipedia so I wanted to ask another editor about this. Juanix-2212 (talk) 18:14, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
