User talk:Bilorv/Archive 12

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

This archive is updated manually by Bilorv.

Archive created 08:51, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Challenge idea

Climatologist: Create articles on populated places (including research stations, as otherwise Ice cap climate would be impossible) in each of the thirty climates of the Köppen climate classification system. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 17:55, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Interesting, Trainsandotherthings, I'd never heard of this classification system before. I like the idea. Two questions: (1) Would interested editors be able to seek out new notable ice cap articles to create (or have most/all of the articles been created already)? (2) As it looks like the definitions are based on temperatures, are places ever reclassified based on climate change or is it highly likely that the system is going to be stable for at least the forseeable future? — Bilorv (talk) 23:14, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

I wondered about the first question too. I see a lot of redlinks at List of research stations in the Arctic which suggests there are a number waiting to be created, and this could also be relaxed to allow "formerly populated places" if necessary. As for the second, reclassifications can happen, but I seriously doubt they would be frequent enough to seriously impact classifications, unless somewhere is right on the border. An alternative is to point to a specific map and base all determinations off that specific map. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:27, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

@Trainsandotherthings: looks good then! I think we'll deal with reclassifications if it arises, erring on the side of allowing a place to count as anything it's ever been classified as. I've gone with the name "Explorer". Thanks for the suggestion! — Bilorv (talk) 10:25, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Question from SundførTannhauser (19:27, 22 November 2022)

Hello! What are the common mistakes made by newcomers? --SundførTannhauser (talk) 19:27, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

@SundførTannhauser: where to start?! I would say that newcomers will inevitably be reverted for making edits that seem natural, but where they don't know the minutiae of our rules on using different varieties of English in different articles, avoiding duplicate links to the same article or which sources are generally reliable. However, none of these are mistakes to avoid, but part of the learning process. I am still reverted, as a 9-year contributor, by somebody who knows a particular policy, guideline, convention or fact that I do not.

But, there are some mistakes made by newcomers that are less productive. I would say the first is underestimating how important reliable sources are. You might have come to Wikipedia to share your knowledge, or notice a burning omission in an article, but if you don't have a reliable source then nobody can tell your edit isn't a hoax or vandalism.

The second is trying to fit Wikipedia around your own aims, rather than fitting yourself into Wikipedia's aims. Let me give you an example. You might be a huge fan of a small YouTuber, and really want Wikipedia to have an article on them. But if the YouTuber isn't notable then you're not actually helping us by trying to make that article. Instead, if you ask yourself, what work does the Wikipedia community need help with?, you will hopefully find that volunteers are grateful for your help. You should have a Homepage with suggested edit recommendations—issues that volunteers have flagged as needing attention from someone. And as you gradually find your way around the site, particularly the topic areas you are interested in, you can find more and more about what needs to be done and what you can help with. Maybe someone has found the sources for a notable YouTuber that you've never heard of, but you can write an article on them. I think the more you view Wikipedia as about learning new facts through research and editing, the more fun you have here.

Thank you for the question! — Bilorv (talk) 20:11, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

This was a great question and response. I like the specific "what work does the Wiki. community need help with" Thequietfactchecker (talk) 04:02, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Salary

Note she only joined this year; the Form shows the salary of her predecessor. I am quite sure however that the present CEO salary will be at least as high. All these executive salaries have gone up all the time, at rates well above inflation. Best, Andreas JN466 11:32, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Jayen466—I've tweaked my comment slightly in line with this, but made note of it so it doesn't appear as if I'm trying to mislead as to what other volunteers were replying to, or worm my way out of admitting mistake. — Bilorv (talk) 17:56, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Question from Henry Nack on Pin insulator (05:33, 11 December 2022)

Hi! I was wondering how to add photos to an article --Henry Nack (talk) 05:33, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@Henry Nack: as Wikipedia is designed to be free to reuse, we largely only use Creative Commons licensed or public domain images. If you have taken a photo yourself and would like to release it under a free license (allowing free use by anybody, perhaps with attribution), then you can upload it to Wikimedia Commons and then add it to an article. This page somewhat takes you through the process: Wikipedia:Uploading images. Let me know if you have further questions! — Bilorv (talk) 12:05, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Question from Peaq1 (07:38, 13 December 2022)

Good to have you as my mentor. Possible we share contact? --Peaq1 (talk) 07:38, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Peaq1! On Wikipedia we prefer, in the name of transparency, for communication to happen on-wiki wherever possible. If the concern is safety-related or there is another extremely clear reason why you would like to message me privately, you can use Special:EmailUser/Bilorv to email me through the email attached to your Wikipedia account.

If you'd like to ask me general questions about Wikipedia, this talk page is the right place and I'm happy to answer anything you are unsure about! — Bilorv (talk) 19:01, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Question from Nikeintsine Abhinay Bhandari Niraula (09:33, 14 December 2022)

how is Wikipedia made ? Who will give accurate information to Wikipedia ? whom to give 1500 documents for Wikipedia I want also make . --Abhinay Bhandari Niraula (talk) 09:33, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@Nikeintsine Abhinay Bhandari Niraula: you can read about how Wikipedia is made at Wikipedia, our outward-facing article about ourselves, or Wikipedia:Who writes Wikipedia?. The short answer is: the readers are the ones who write Wikipedia, and we require reliable sources for each claim to ensure that other readers can check that the claim is true.

I don't understand your comment about 1500 documents, but perhaps if you reword this part I can answer it. — Bilorv (talk) 19:03, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Are you trying to be antagonistic? or is this just bad wording and the internet causing misunderstanding?

The way you have behaved and the attitude you have shown over linking one word is frankly an absurdity. Are you trying to piss me off? Are you trying to be as petty as possible? Are you trying to be as patronising and demeaning as possible? I say this to you: stop. You are not engaging with me in any way constructively. I mean seriously permalinking to my user talk page, where there is no value to do so. Where it is only for you to have another dig at me. If you apologise and remove the permalink I will let this slide as an honest mistake and the internet not being good at making nuance known. You are skating on very thin ice of acting in bad faith, acting as a gatekeeper, and acting as an article owner. You have not come across in good faith, you have not come across collegially or constructively and you are coming across as some who pushes their way or nothing. Sparkle1 (talk) 20:38, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sparkle1: you have asked me not to post to your talk page again, so I will not do so unless required by policy, and please remind me of this if I forget as I have a bad memory for usernames. I will reply here with pings as this is where you have started a thread.

Protracted disagreement should be resolved through discussion and seeking additional opinion, so this is what I have done at Talk:Abigail Thorn. I am happy to accept whatever others think at the talk page as consensus. I am glad that you have (tacitly) dropped the "screenwriter" noun, as I was confused as to which of Thorn's activities this referred to. The "playwright" link is a much more minor point but I think I have made my opinion clear and I apologise if I misrepresented your position, which I see you have elaborated on at the article talk page. — Bilorv (talk) 21:43, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the apology can you please also strike through the unnecessary permalink to my talk page and your quoting of my talk page on the Abigail Thorn talk page. When you do that I will strike out the second portion of my comments on the same talk page, which are directed at you. That will then end the matter. Sparkle1 (talk) 00:12, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sparkle1: I am happy to strike the quote that you feel misrepresented your position, with reference to this discussion, which I have done. I am not happy to strike the link to your talk page, and feel it is out of scope for you to compel me to change my own wording and the quite routine link to the discussion that was impetus for me to start the section at Talk:Abigail Thorn. — Bilorv (talk) 21:40, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Sparkle1 is right. Avoiding conflict from now on is the right way to go. Noman (talk) 09:13, 20 December 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.2.67 (talk)

Question from Adeel Hussain kashmiri on Help:Getting started (14:21, 20 December 2022)

hello --Adeel Hussain kashmiri (talk) 14:21, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Adeel Hussain kashmiri and welcome to Wikipedia! Let me know if you have any questions. — Bilorv (talk) 21:23, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your kind words, i just want to how can i contribute to wikipedia pages, make changes and Add value able information for the audience. Adeel Hussain kashmiri (talk) 19:38, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@Adeel Hussain kashmiri: almost every Wikipedia article has an "Edit" button that you can press, and we encourage volunteers to be bold. If you make a change and it's actually not an improvement, someone should undo that change and explain why, so you've learned something new; if it is an improvement, then it should stick and the encyclopedia is improved. The main thing to bear in mind as a newcomer is to start small and to find reliable sources for every fact you add. Can you see a statement in an article that doesn't have a reliable source and find one to add? Or can you find a sentence that you could reword so its meaning is clearer? — Bilorv (talk) 21:19, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Question from ธีรภัทร์ ศรีสมบัติ (23:19, 21 December 2022)

ɯeb5.0 --ธีรภัทร์ ศรีสมบัติ (talk) 23:19, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi ธีรภัทร์ ศรีสมบัติ and welcome to Wikipedia! Let me know if you have any questions. — Bilorv (talk) 07:39, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Question from Cpawk (00:45, 23 December 2022)

Hi Bilorv, really excited to get started contributing to Wikipedia! My knowledge base is mainly in US/European/Latin American history and culture, so that's where I imagine I will be of most use. Is there any subject that you think could use some edits in any of those areas? --Cpawk (talk) 00:45, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Cpawk! Fantastic question! You've probably seen the "Suggested edits" feature on your homepage which lets you specify some broad topics and then gives you some articles that volunteers have tagged as needing additional sources or copyediting or whatever it might be.

You might also take a look at some relevant WikiProjects—groups of editors interested in a subject, although each WikiProject can vary in levels of activity. You could try: Wikipedia:WikiProject Latin America, Wikipedia:WikiProject European history and Wikipedia:WikiProject United States History.

It can take a while to find where to put your skills to use, but with a positive attitude and a willingness to learn you will work it out. We focus very heavily on reliable sources—rather than personal knowledge, you might think "I just read this great article/book about X, so maybe I could add some information from that to a relevant article". And I would recommend that you start trying to make small improvement to existing articles and take your time in building up to larger edits and even new article creation. — Bilorv (talk) 12:20, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Question from DavidFinFro (07:12, 26 December 2022)

Hi Bilorv,

I just want to wish you and your family a very merry Yuletide and a prosperous, healthy, joyful New Year. Thanks for your guidance in 2022. Best regards, David --DavidFinFro (talk) 07:12, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

@DavidFinFro: thank you! And the same to you. — Bilorv (talk) 11:10, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Question from Moneeka0408 (09:04, 31 December 2022)

hello how can I create a page for a person (biography) --Moneeka0408 (talk) 09:04, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

@Moneeka0408: thank you for the question! You might be surprised to learn that the answer in most cases is: you can't. Wikipedia only hosts articles on topics that are notable, a jargon word that means "have been written about in detail by multiple reliable sources independent of the subject". For individuals, that could mean many different things—maybe their book has been reviewed in dozens of national newspapers; maybe their Olympic medal-winning performance was reported internationally; maybe they have been profiled in several high-quality sources.

However, most individuals that newcomers wish to write about are not notable (these reliable sources don't exist): in this case, there's no amount of good writing or wikitext formatting that will compensate for a factor outside their control. Creating a biography article is a particularly poor choice for a newcomer—take a look at Special:Homepage and you'll see some smaller tasks that would help you build up your skills to this larger challenge. Whether you are writing a new article or (preferably) improving an existing one, you should be focused on finding high-quality reliable sources to verify each fact that you add. — Bilorv (talk) 11:53, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Challenge idea

I thought of an idea for your challenges page -- I'm not sure what to call it, but it would be something like this: Create an article on two different topics with the same name (with a bonus for creating the topic's dab page). BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:08, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

@BeanieFan11: yes, great idea! For a title, I'm keen on "Ambiguation" (surely the opposite of "Disambiguation"). What do you think?

Ambiguation: create two articles that have the same title except for parentheticals, such as any two of King, King (chess) and King (playing card).

Bonus: for also creating the disambiguation page.

I can think of a couple of good sources of these—movies based on books and albums named after one of their singles—but the most fun examples would be two unrelated things with the same name. I think I'm yet to meet the requirements myself. — Bilorv (talk) 18:50, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

I think that would be a good title -- I thought of the idea last night after writing articles on T. J. Carter and T. J. Carter -- two football players who are shockingly members of the same team! BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:01, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

@BeanieFan11: added! Yes, that is a huge coincidence—and with it you should get the first win on this. Thanks for your suggestion! — Bilorv (talk) 21:09, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Bilorv!

Happy New Year!

Bilorv,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 02:41, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 02:41, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Assessment request

Bilorv, WP:FILMBIO doesn't have assessment requests, but I know you do assessments for WP:TV, so I thought I would try asking you to do an independent article assessment – Could you please take a look at Julianna Guill, and see if you think the article is C-class at this point? Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:57, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

@IJBall: thanks for the request! I'm always happy to receive these. I think it's confidently C-class, and pushing B-class—what might bring it there could be a couple of two-sentence summaries of Guill's more important roles, like "Guill's character in Real Movie IV is a likeable but unintelligent teenager. Critics described her acting as X, Y and Z". Any more details for how she got into acting or interview comments would add to the article, too, but I imagine you might be limited by what sources exist. — Bilorv (talk) 11:30, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Interesting – I've never bothered with 'B'-class before (because, frankly, I've never understood the criteria!). But I can look at Haley Bennett which is an article I used to edit and which is now 'B'-class, if I need a comparison.

There definitely might be some "review-bait"-type content that can be added to the article – I remember looking at a NY Times review of Friday The 13th that specifically said Guill was the "find" of that film. It may be harder to find other examples... As for interviews, those may be difficult to scrounge up. But I'll see what I can do in the next few weeks. If I find the content you're suggesting, I'll return here to request a second look! Thanks again!! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:49, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

While we're at it, would you be willing to take a look at Meghann Fahy as well? It's definitely to 'C'-class now, but the article already included some critical response to her The Bold Type role, and I've tried doing the same for her The White Lotus role (of which there is lots more coverage/reviews)... Is this one at 'B'-level yet? (Feel free to make any improvements of your own that you like!) Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:40, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

@IJBall: I assess on the generous side compared to most assessments I see, but I've noticed people are quite conservative on B-class ratings, to the point where I have seen articles that would likely get passed at GA with minor corrections, yet are declined B-class ratings.

Funny you should ask about Meghann Fahy as I viewed the article yesterday when I recognised her in something that wasn't The Bold Type (which I'm a fan of). Yes, in my opinion it's B-class—there's more to be said about her major roles and probably her early/personal life, but all the major aspects are present and referenced (including an image, not easy to come by). There is one part confuses me a little: ... though Fahy did not participate in that production. Did she perform in the play at all? What's the relevance of mentioning something she didn't act in? — Bilorv (talk) 19:56, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Reginald the Vampire

The sources show that the program exists, but not that it is notable. Did it win any awards? Are there any reviews of the show by professional critics?

A show not having awards or reviews does not disqualify from it being in the article space. There are plenty of TV shows in the article space that don't have this. I should just move the draft myself than put up with this review nonsense. Xeditboy (talk) 23:52, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

It fails WP:GNG and WP:NTV because all it contains are Ratings for each episode. There is no Production info such as Development and Casting info nor reviews by professional critics. — YoungForever^(talk) 00:04, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

@Xeditboy: poor-quality articles on TV are widespread on Wikipedia, yes, and this is not news to me, no. I didn't write such articles and I spend much time improving them (examples from this year: 1, 2). When I started editing Wikipedia, I believe it was common practice to assume a TV show notable if it aired on a national channel. Today, per WP:NTVNATL, the presence or absence of reliable sources is more definitive than the geographic range of the program's audience alone.

You are free to move this to mainspace yourself. In fact, I gather that you already did and Onel5969 moved it back to draftspace, questioning its notability. If moved to mainspace again, the next move would not be draftspace again but either addition of sources so that the article meets notability or (in the absence of sources) nomination for deletion through Articles for Deletion. — Bilorv (talk) 00:13, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Well, I tell a lie actually. I did create 8 Out of 10 Cats Does Countdown in a sad state that didn't demonstrate notability (and it's not on that good footing today, although it does mention enough awards to scrape through). But whether enforced or not (we're chronically short on experienced volunteers), the point is that every article should demonstrate notability somehow. — Bilorv (talk) 00:20, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

@Bilorv:A show doesn't win any awards when it just finished airing it's first season which is the for the above crappy game show example. And low rated shows on low viewer channels never get reviews. And notability doesn't really apply to TV shows as they are all notable enough when they are given a pick up and make it to air. Xeditboy (talk) 00:45, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

That's completely bs. You clearly did not read WP:GNG and WP:NTV. WP:NTV is specifically about television notability. — YoungForever^(talk) 02:28, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

@Xeditboy: notability applies to all articles on Wikipedia, except stand-alone lists. What you're describing to me is that the programme is unlikely to be notable (at the present moment), as there are not sufficient sources. This is a normal part of editing Wikipedia. I will regularly be interested in creating an article, do the research and not find enough sources to convince myself of notability. In this case, I either have to find an existing article where I can incorporate a new section on my research, or move onto a different topic. — Bilorv (talk) 13:57, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

@Xeditboy: actually, looking at Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic, it looks like there's plenty of sources that could contribute to notability. Why not add some summaries of these reviews? — Bilorv (talk) 16:59, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Bias

Let me just say first that I very much respect your dedication to Wikipedia and the politeness you've demonstrated in my interactions with you. Now, you've acted as the decider in multiple past disagreements involving myself where, judging by (for example) the books you've listed yourself as a major contributor to on your user page, you held preexisting political proclivities which I believe influenced your contribution. Frankly, I find someone very obviously biased on a topic deciding on the victor in a dispute regarding that topic to be deeply disturbing. I understand that you're not a moderator or an administrator, but your extensive edit history and involvement does give you a more authoritative presence than most contributors. I also admit to not being a perfect font of objectivity myself, but again my concern applies specifically to you as the decider.

Put more bluntly, the experiences I've had with you have sapped my enthusiasm to continue contributing to Wikipedia, and I suspect others have felt the same.

Now, I know this is a sort of murky water. The disagreements I mentioned happened a while ago and I don't think the specifics of the disagreements are as important as their overarching political implications. I emphasize the political nature of this bias because I believe that to be its least benign form.

While I'm not sure if this is going to make any sense to you, assuming you do accept my concerns as valid, I ask that in the future you at least consider abstaining from the moderation of topics you know you have some passionate attachment to. Pernicious.Editor (talk) 06:08, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

@Pernicious.Editor: there are no "victors" in disagreements. In a small discussion, relevant WikiProjects can be notified to get more opinions, so that my own opinion is not a deciding factor. In a larger discussion, my single voice cannot constitute the presence or absence of consensus.

We all have political positions and, in my experience, those who are forthcoming about them are a lot easier to work with than those who aren't. While I make no secret of the fact that I am left-wing, and my choice of topics reflects this, I believe it is a positive sign that you refer to me as being polite towards you and that you have not specifically described my ideology any further. I think there are many opinions of mine that would surprise you—for instance, I am a critic of Ibram X. Kendi and Robin DiAngelo, privately, and I don't bring that onto Wikipedia. In fact, very few of the articles I have written on TV and literature contain reviews that are anything like my personal reviews of the subject.

I am sorry that you have been discouraged from contributing to Wikipedia. Very few newcomers stick around when arriving with the intent of changing political content on the topics of race, gender and sexuality. You are met with much more kindness if you can demonstrate a history of small productive edits to poor-quality articles, such as those recommended to you on your homepage, particularly when your edits show you adding reliable sources for each fact you add. — Bilorv (talk) 11:04, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Question from Contentekarishma (09:11, 7 January 2023)

Hi! How can I post a new page pls? --Contentekarishma (talk) 09:11, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

@Contentekarishma: thank you for the question! You might be surprised to learn that the answer in most cases is: you can't. Wikipedia only hosts articles on topics that are notable, a jargon word that means "have been written about in detail by multiple reliable sources independent of the subject". That could mean newspaper or magazine articles, academic papers, professionally published books or various other things.

However, most topics that newcomers wish to write about are not notable (these reliable sources don't exist): in this case, there's no amount of good writing or wikitext formatting that will compensate for a factor outside their control. Creating a new article is a poor choice for a newcomer—take a look at Special:Homepage and you'll see some smaller tasks that would help you build up your skills to this larger challenge. Whether you are writing a new article or (preferably) improving an existing one, you should be focused on finding high-quality reliable sources to verify each fact that you add. — Bilorv (talk) 09:44, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Mentor!

how are you doing? GreatReaderof21st (talk) 07:20, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi GreatReaderof21st and thank you for the question! I am doing well. Let me know if you have any questions about Wikipedia. — Bilorv (talk) 22:27, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Invisible Barnstar
		Thank you for participating in Articles for Creation's January 2023 Backlog Drive! You reviewed 22 drafts during the drive. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 00:34, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:37, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Question from TS7709 on User:TS7709/sandbox (18:03, 27 January 2023)

How do I get this out of sandbox and publish it --TS7709 (talk) 18:03, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@TS7709: before this draft can be moved to mainspace, there are a number of improvements that need to be made. First of all, the draft does not cite any reliable sources, which means that readers cannot check if the information is true and there is no evidence that the subject is notable (eligible for a Wikipedia article). Additionally, the draft is not written in a neutral style, with sentences like "That is an impressive number of sales".

Do you have a personal connection to Connie Walker? — Bilorv (talk) 20:46, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

TFL notification

Hi, Bilorv. I'm just posting to let you know that List of Black Mirror episodes – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for February 20. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 22:43, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Question from Welcomes 2023 (12:33, 29 January 2023)

Please created my user page for design. --Welcomes 2023 (talk) 12:33, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Welcomes 2023! I'm not sure what your question is—could you rephrase it? — Bilorv (talk) 17:33, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Question from MillenialWikiDude on Betterware (02:07, 30 January 2023)

How do I create an article that already exists, but in another language? In this case Spanish --MillenialWikiDude (talk) 02:07, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@MillenialWikiDude: different language versions of Wikipedia are run by different communities. You can visit the Spanish Wikipedia and find their guidance on translating articles (here's our own) and what it takes for a topic to be "notable" (suitable for a Wikipedia article), but I'm afraid I'm not personally familiar with it as I don't speak the language. — Bilorv (talk) 22:30, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Question from Nico 408 (10:01, 30 January 2023)

Hello, Bilorv! I'm really at a loss about disambiguating the article I submitted. There was a suggestion on it but when I look over the article again and the help reference, I can't figure out how this is accomplished.

Any recommended tips or suggestions for getting this done? --Nico 408 (talk) 10:01, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Nico 408: I take it that the draft is Draft:James Connell. Here, the comment is really directed at the (future) reviewer more than yourself. If the draft is accepted, it wouldn't be located at James Connell, as this is an existing disambiguation page. Instead it would be moved to something like James Connell (lawyer). You could have used this disambiguator when creating the draft, but the submission wouldn't be declined for this reason. Instead the draft will be assessed primarily against notability standards.

The draft could be waiting for review for another hour, or another 2 months—unfortunately we have a real shortage of volunteers in this area and they can review articles in any order based on subject knowledge or whatever else. — Bilorv (talk) 22:40, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Yeah I meant to put (human rights attorney) in the draft but spaced. I feel bad because I'm doing this for a friend. No worries about when this gets reviewed. I let James know this could take some time. Nico 408 (talk) 09:21, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@Nico 408: do you have a personal connection to the subject of the draft? If so, you need to follow the Conflict of interest guidance. You can create a userpage with the template {{UserboxCOI|James Connell (attorney)}} or a sentence saying "I have a conflict of interest in subjects involving the attorney James Connell" to properly disclose your connection. — Bilorv (talk) 20:27, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Not a personal connection. We volunteer at the same organization so it's more of a professional networking friendship. I'm the tech guy for our org so he reached out to me and asked if I could help him with this. I saw it as an opportunity to learn something I've never done before and here we are!

There is no conflict of interest. Nico 408 (talk) 10:10, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

@Nico 408: what you've just described is a conflict of interest, as the phrase is used on Wikipedia. You should note that having an article about oneself is not necessarily a good thing and that no amount of good writing, research or diligence will allow an article to be created unless the subject is "notable" in Wikipedia jargon, which most people who request an article about themselves are not. — Bilorv (talk) 18:33, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

I definitely reviewed the notable definition according to Wiki and found it satisfied the requirements. I wouldn't have put this kind of effort into this article had I thought the subject was worthy of an encyclopedia. Thank you for responding though, I really appreciate it! 98.37.126.213 (talk) 12:21, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Question from MillenialWikiDude (18:07, 30 January 2023)

How do I make a draft public? --MillenialWikiDude (talk) 18:07, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@MillenialWikiDude: see my comment above. If your draft is in Spanish then it belongs on the Spanish Wikipedia, and you'll have to find their page creation processes there. This looks like it could be the right page to get started. — Bilorv (talk) 22:32, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay. Then I'll write in in English. So, once I have the draft ready, how do I make it public? D: MillenialWikiDude (talk) 00:48, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@MillenialWikiDude: you can submit drafts through the Articles for Creation process when you are convinced that the reliable sources in the article demonstrate notability of the subject. Since you originally asked about a topic that already exists in Wikipedia—a duplicate page would not be created; any new sources and information can be incorporated into the existing article. — Bilorv (talk) 20:30, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Question from Thequietfactchecker (18:04, 31 January 2023)

Hi Bilorv,

Thank you! This isn't a question, but just a polite hello, and I appreciate the note (though I'm wagering that it is an auto-generated one nonetheless, I still felt warm while being welcomed).

I will take full advantage of your offer to guide when the time comes, as I'm sure it will.

Take care, and be well,

Thequietfactchecker

P.S. I am quite a strong researcher, so if you ever need assistance sourcing, please reach out. --Thequietfactchecker (talk) 18:04, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Question from Thequietfactchecker (20:16, 31 January 2023)

Hey Coach!

I got to a good question point. There are some articles I'm editing that do not have a cover image, and I am very aware of how to navigate copyrights, but I want to play by the Wiki Rules.

What is the process for bringing an image that I can reference / credit the author for (i.e. a stock image for say "business intelligence" (a segment where there would likely not be a specific image related to the topic.

Thank You! --Thequietfactchecker (talk) 20:16, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@Thequietfactchecker: thanks for your two comments! I'll reply to both here. The message is automatically sent to you, but written by me and genuinely meant.

For images, take a look at Wikipedia:How to upload a photo. Wikipedia is much stricter than fair use law requires us to be, as we are part of the libre community: we generally only take CC-BY-SA or more liberally copyrighted (or public domain) media. When you upload a freely copyrighted image to Wikimedia Commons, the process should take you through the way to attribute the authors.

Let me know if you have any more questions. — Bilorv (talk) 20:40, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Great. Yes, I was practicing on my own account (it lead me down a rabbit-hole; you're actually in the "story" check it out! hehe). The photos feel like a trial and error situation to get used to it, but I'm glad Wiki stops you right away rather than letting it sit for a bunch of days.

Thank you for getting back to me! Thequietfactchecker (talk) 21:04, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Question from Shibbole (06:34, 2 February 2023)

Hola, quiero saber si mi página ya está publicada o está aún en edición. ¡Gracias! --Shibbole (talk) 06:34, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@Shibbole: this is the English Wikipedia and we only host articles that are written in English. The Spanish Wikipedia, a related but different community, hosts articles in Spanish. You have created a draft, Draft:Logia Hiram Abif 80 de Alicante, which will not be published here as it is in Spanish. I believe this is the page to begin creating a draft in the Spanish Wikipedia. — Bilorv (talk) 18:04, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help! Best regards. Shibbole (talk) 18:16, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Question from Saadu Ukasha (22:15, 2 February 2023)

Hello

I want to create my profile and history --Saadu Ukasha (talk) 22:15, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@Saadu Ukasha: you should not create a Wikipedia article about yourself. See Wikipedia:Writing about yourself and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. If you meet Wikipedia's notability criteria, a volunteer may create an article about you in due course. — Bilorv (talk) 22:22, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Question from Mpsaharan8 (12:39, 5 February 2023)

My Artical "Rampal chahar " is already reviewed but not index yet why ?? --Mpsaharan8 (talk) 12:39, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

@Mpsaharan8: yes, as far as I can see the article Rampal Chahar should be indexed per Wikipedia:Controlling search engine indexing, as it was patrolled on 31 January 2023. If it is not appearing in a search engine, this may be due to the search engine de-prioritising the result (e.g. to low pageviews) or due to lag (the search engine's web crawlers may not have visited the page yet).

A small point: it is not your article, as no one person owns any article and others are free to make any changes they like, so long as those changes are improvements per the community's norms. — Bilorv (talk) 13:29, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your time for clear my doubts . About small point my means was that written by me . thanx again ❤ Mpsaharan8 (talk) 13:33, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi from Clovermoss

You expressed interest in my Signpost essay about the technical issues/phabricator tickets related to the Wikipedia app, so I figured I'd let you know that I'm trying to keep all of this updated here. There's actually one more that's been added to the list since then: phab:T328453. I noticed that when I realized random bytes were + or - in my watchlist whenever one of my redirects was reviewed (attributed to the patroller without them editing the page at all). Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 03:19, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

@Clovermoss: thanks for letting me know! It's interesting to see the progress that's been made since the report, although it is concerning how many issues just one active user has been able to find. — Bilorv (talk) 20:44, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

On another subject, a brief glance at your userpage seems to suggest that you've done some quality content work in regards to racism. I've been trying to do something with Draft:Racial segregation in Canada for awhile and I think more eyes would be useful. Any chance you'd be interested? Or even just some constructive advice on what I could be doing. It's quite short as of now considering the subject matter but I'm trying to expand it. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 13:01, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

@Clovermoss: I won't be able to get back to you on this for a few days, but I'll do my best to give some feedback when I've got the time. — Bilorv (talk) 21:24, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

That's okay, no rush! I look forward to your input. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 21:37, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Question From Taggedelee

Firstly, I am very happy be your mentor and my question is how to create a file for a film image and the process to publish the same Image File with all necessity? Taggedelee (talk) 18:06, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

How to create a file for a film image and the process to publish the same Image File with all necessity? --Taggedelee (talk) 18:07, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Taggedelee and thanks for the question! Just so you're aware, I received it twice.

Most images in Wikipedia are freely licensed, and hosted on Wikimedia Commons. Film posters are generally non-free content and only allowed on Wikipedia with an appropriate fair use rationale. In most cases, a single film poster of low resolution in the infobox of an article (not a draft) about the film is appropriate. You can upload one through Wikipedia:File upload wizard, in this case choosing "Upload a non-free file" as film posters are (almost always) copyrighted. — Bilorv (talk) 20:33, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!!!

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		For your participation and help at Wikipedia:Good Article proposal drive 2023. It wouldn't have been such a success without you. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 03:48, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Question from Eric of Frobozz (01:00, 9 March 2023)

Thank you! --Eric of Frobozz (talk) 01:00, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Question from Elegantabi (18:33, 11 March 2023)

What do tou guys in ur own language and culture religion to a JINN (Ghost) About Alkaboos Jinn --Elegantabi (talk) 18:33, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

@Elegantabi: I am sorry, but I do not understand this question. There are lots of Wikipedias in other languages if you would prefer to write in another language. — Bilorv (talk) 18:40, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Question from Igogo2023 (04:20, 13 March 2023)

would my editing of various pages including external links help me with page ranking on Google. and what is the most ethical way to do it --Igogo2023 (talk) 04:20, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Igogo2023: you must not edit Wikipedia to further personal or financial interests. Wikipedia is by and large written by volunteers who are independent of the subjects and sources they are writing about. You will be blocked from editing if you add external links to Wikipedia with the intent of improving the website's listing in a search engine tool; cleaning up after such activity wastes unpaid volunteer's time. — Bilorv (talk) 18:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Question from FS

I agree that there were wp:opinion content after I edited it. But these high-tone things were there even before i editedPeterson–Žižek debate: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia FatalSubjectivities (talk) 09:33, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@FatalSubjectivities: could you expand on what you mean a little bit? What "high-tone things" are you thinking of? — Bilorv (talk) 18:07, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Question from Jhpeppler (22:49, 13 March 2023)

Hello, I want to set up a wiki page about myself. using the title- "Jim Peppler" as I am publically known. I'm aging (80+) had a long and diverse career as a Photojournalist covering the Civil Rights movement (a Collection in my name is in the Alabama Dept of Archives and History); have illustrations in several books (Taylor Branch's "At Canaan's Edge" uses my pix and reports a bit about me); I worked for NEWSDAY of Long Island NY for 40 years- covering MANY significant event (some exclusively)..also worked in prisons as a Facilitator of AVP and other projects of community service. DOES ANY OF THIS QUALIFY ME?? Mostly, I want to leave a legacy for my Great-Grandchildren??? --Jhpeppler (talk) 22:49, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi Jhpeppler and thanks for your question! It sounds like you have lived a fascinating life and made lots of important contributions to documenting history.

Unfortunately, writing an autobiography is strongly discouraged: Wikipedia is written by volunteers who are independent of the subjects they write about, which is really important to ensure a neutral point of view. If you are "notable"—Wikipedia jargon for whether a biography would be within our scope—then a volunteer may create an article about you. — Bilorv (talk) 22:31, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Question from Mpsaharan8 (09:49, 16 March 2023)

hello dear sir I have created a page “ atalanta kercyku” which has also been reviewed but still it is not getting indexed in search why? --Mpsaharan8 (talk) 09:49, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

@Mpsaharan8: see Wikipedia:Controlling search engine indexing. Patrolled pages newer than 90 days are indexed by default but this can be overriden by templates that use the magic word __NOINDEX__. However, any particular search engine may not have a web crawler that has yet visited the page, or the private company may choose not to index the page or to give it a low rank (or use an algorithm that does so). — Bilorv (talk) 10:04, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Ok

thanks a lot sir ❤️ Mpsaharan8 (talk) 10:06, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

barnstar

{{subst:bilorv|1=for helping natureMpsaharan8 (talk) 10:25, 16 March 2023 (UTC)|2=alt}}

Question from Turtlefl123 (18:40, 18 March 2023)

Hello, I attempted to edit an article 'Trench Coat' earlier and my additions were taken off. So I set up an account since I would like to add to that article. I have done research on this topic so I think I can improve the page. --Turtlefl123 (talk) 18:40, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

@Turtlefl123: you can see the history of all edits to the article Trench coat by clicking View history. It appears that Riverbend21 reverted your edits with the explanation "Not providing a reliable source". Indeed, everything in Wikipedia should have a reliable source so other readers can tell that the information is correct. I notice that you gave one source, Tynan, Jane Trench Coat (Object Lessons) New York: Bloomsbury, 2022. If you retrace your research, hopefully you can find sources with which you can re-add the content in question. — Bilorv (talk) 18:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Question from Jsksodhfkdk (19:28, 19 March 2023)

Hey how to do I post a question --Jsksodhfkdk (talk) 19:28, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Jsksodhfkdk, and welcome to Wikipedia! I'm not sure I understand your comment: you have successfully managed to get into contact with me. If you have a question, you can reply to this section and ask it. — Bilorv (talk) 18:49, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Question from I like lincoln town cars (05:21, 21 March 2023)

how do i make edits without people constantly reverting them when i try fixing typos? --I like lincoln town cars (talk) 05:21, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

@I like lincoln town cars: you can see by clicking "View history" the entire log of changes to an article, e.g. Ram pickup, whereby you can see edit summaries of anyone who has reverted you or access user talk pages where you can discuss with editors who have undone your changes.

Looking through your contributions, I see two edits tagged as "Reverted". The first changes "2006 Facelift" to "2006 facelift"; while Wikipedia generally uses sentence case for section headers, if "2006 Facelift" is a brand name (I don't know the subject well enough) then capitalisation would be correct. In the second case, you remove one of two correctly nested brackets, the first of which completes the inner bracket "(1943–1998)" and the second of which completes the outer bracket "(formerly the ...)" If there are other reverted edits you'd like me to look at, please point me to them.

I also notice that your userpage seems to contain content copied from another location, such as a Wikipedia article. Please read Wikipedia:Copyright violations and Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia for legal information about copying text, and amend your userpage accordingly. — Bilorv (talk) 21:26, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Question from KpmLiswin18 (15:02, 22 March 2023)

Hi I can Created Three article about Metropolitan Malabar Independent Syrian Church The one of the draft declined (Draft: Joseph Koorilose IX) i added more sources and refrances but still declined please help to this article. And i created another article Draft: Mathews Koorilose VIII and Draft: Geevarghese Philoxenos II it still not reviewed. --KpmLiswin18 (talk) 15:02, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

@KpmLiswin18: Wikipedia has a chronic issue with lack of volunteer labour, and as such many drafts take a long time to be reviewed. I have no expertise in this subject area (and perhaps nor do many volunteers, leading to longer wait times), so I cannot tell whether the sources you have provided are reliable, secondary and independent, thus showing notability of the topic.

However, I can offer some feedback with the style in which the drafts are written. Draft:Joseph Koorilose IX says: These ecumenical initiatives undertaken by the Mar Koorilose IX highlight his unique ability to influence ... This is not a neutral description of the subject, so it needs rewriting. Any description of a person's legacy or impact should also be very carefully sourced with inline citations and often attributed in prose ("Joe Bloggs described Joseph Koorilose IX's impact as..."), so the reader can check it is not the opinion of the Wikipedia editor but a scholarly opinion. Content in Draft:Kuriakose Gregorios appears to have serious neutrality issues throughout, with entirely inappropriate unsourced commentary like: Pampady Thirumeni was a very good student and would always listen intently during class. He studied well and was a very quiet and obedient child.

You are welcome to discuss with volunteers who have declined your drafts and ask for additional feedback. — Bilorv (talk) 21:33, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

i will reedit the article please check and find other problems KpmLiswin18 (talk) 01:57, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Joseph_Koorilose_IX KpmLiswin18 (talk) 01:58, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Question from ธีรภัทร์ ศรีสมบัติ (03:46, 8 April 2023)

Begins with 'ssh-rsa', 'ecdsa-sha2-nistp256', 'ecdsa-sha2-nistp384', 'ecdsa-sha2-nistp521', 'ssh-ed25519', 'sk-ecdsa-sha2-nistp256@openssh.com', or'sk-ssh- ed25519@openssh.com' --ธีรภัทร์ ศรีสมบัติ (talk) 03:46, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi ธีรภัทร์ ศรีสมบัติ and welcome to Wikipedia! If you are interested in using Secure Shell to connect to a network remotely, the code to do this will depend on your SSH client and command-line interface. Unless your question is about editing Wikipedia, however, you would be better off contacting your system administrators or somebody else who can help you. — Bilorv (talk) 09:25, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Triple Crown

Thank you Eurohunter (talk) 16:02, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

DeRuyter, Madison County, New York

Researching my Mothers side, The Benjamin's With that I have information on the village of DeRuyter taken from the Genealogy of the Benjamin's. The book "The Be3njamin's in America" by Gloria Wall Bicha, published in 1976 states that my 4th great grandfather Elijah Benjamin and his Brother Elias, my 4th great granduncle. Elijah Benjamin served in the Revolution in the 7thy Regiment under the command of Colonel Henry Ludington's New York Militia.

From the book in Elijah's section Elijah, with his brother Elias and Eli Colgrave, started the settlement of DeRuyter, New York in 1793, when he came from Southeast, Dutchess County, New York. He was listed in the 1790 Federal Census at Southeast with: 1-3-2. He located on 150 acres of land in the northwest corner of the township, and opened clearings where the village now stands. The first burial ground for the early settlement in Madison County was located on Elijah's farm. Elijah, his wife Elizabeth, and sons Elijah E. and David, traveled from Dutchess Co. to DeRuyter by horse team. Migster6244 (talk) 20:49, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

@Migster6244: welcome to Wikipedia! Generally, an individual's genealogical research of their family tree cannot be included on Wikipedia because it is original research. Errors compounding from records of individuals with identical names or mistakes in records are commonplace. However, professional historical research that has been published in a reliable source like a peer-reviewed journal article or a book published by an academic press can sometimes be included on Wikipedia. The book you reference by Bicha does not appear to be such a source. — Bilorv (talk) 21:19, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Question from Dannykattan (03:16, 24 April 2023)

Hi Bilorv, its a pleasure. I think i created a link to an article i wrote and was published about the matter, I wanted the word "foreclosure" to be tied via a footnote to the link of the article, I was snot able to do this. can you please help. --Dannykattan (talk) 03:16, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Dannykattan, and welcome to Wikipedia! I assume you are talking about the draft Draft:Residential Leaseback, which has been declined today by another volunteer; it is not a reader-facing article at the moment. Every fact in Wikipedia needs a reliable source, and additionally article topics need sources that show "notability"—Wikipedia jargon for whether something is in our scope or outside it.

I'm not too sure what particular question you are asking: are you talking about an internal link or an external reference, and something on the draft page or on some other page? — Bilorv (talk) 21:38, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Question from Nisalshailesh (10:33, 25 April 2023)

Hello, I wish to add some people and their work on Wikipedia. How can I do it? --Nisalshailesh (talk) 10:33, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

@Nisalshailesh: hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Creating a new article is one of the hardest tasks on Wikipedia and I wouldn't recommend it to newcomers: most people do not fit our "notability" criteria, a jargon term used to describe what is within the scope of Wikipedia. You should also be advised that if you know these people in real life, you will have a conflict of interest and must follow that guidance. Instead, good tasks for newcomers can be found on your homepage and include adding new information with reliable sources to existing articles and rewriting content to improve the wording. Let me know if you have any further questions! — Bilorv (talk) 18:53, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

The news site What's On Netflix is a reputable source

Previous information in the article has since confirmed to be correct by the trailer release and subsequent announcements from netflix, which further confirms the trustworthyness of the source. Just because information does not come directly from official announcments certainly doesn't preclude it from being included in articles, so long as the source is trustworthy, and the information verifiable. For example - there are photographs which show specific directors with clapperboards showing which # episodes they have directed, and filming photos show which directors are on which shoots. 88.98.207.244 (talk) 14:19, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, this happened in 2016, in 2017 and 2019, and we went through the same thing then. The episode details have leaked (although the ordering is likely not finalised) but it is not suitable for Wikipedia without a reliable source. This does not always mean an official announcement: it means that professional publications like The Hollywood Reporter or Variety describe the information as true. Fansites combined with details like the poster are not reliable for Wikipedia's purpose: this is original research. While I am confident the information is largely accurate in a personal capacity, an encyclopedia isn't the same thing as a list of things we both think is true. — Bilorv (talk) 14:26, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

What's on Netflix is unequivocally an unreliable site. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 14:45, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

What's on Netflix is most definitely not a reliable source as it is a fansite and they sometimes even use IMDb as a source. — YoungForever^(talk) 17:57, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Please cite examples. Playrpro (talk) 16:33, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

For rejecting The Recess( 2021 film)

Hi

The notability is in the subject not the festival run. This short film is the only short film that brings to life the story of Sahar Khodayari known as Blue Girl in Iran.

Please see: Death of Sahar Khodayari - Wikipedia

The Recess is mentioned in the article above on Wikipedia. You can delete the article on Sahar Khodayari as well if you do not find any notability in it.

زنگ تفریح (فیلم ۲۰۲۱) - ویکی‌پدیا، دانشنامهٔ آزاد (wikipedia.org)

The Recess serves as a historical document on the issue.

The article rejected is available on Wikipedia in four other languages.

If you see the notability and importance of the subject, which features the story of an Iranian protestor, please consider accepting the draft and move it to articles. Ziznews (talk) 15:23, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

@Ziznews: I have been out on the streets chanting Jin, Jiyan, Azadî and I oppose the government oppression of women in Iran. It is good to see volunteers interested in improving Wikipedia's coverage of these issues.

"Notability" is a jargon term on the English Wikipedia that refers to what is within our scope. Notability can only be demonstrated through reliable, independent, in-depth references, not through explanations of why the topic is important.

Different language editions of Wikipedia have different scopes, democratically decided by volunteers on each project. The article Death of Sahar Khodayari has a large number of independent sources, such as the BBC, The Guardian and Deutsche Welle that show its international significance, but notability is not inherited automatically from a large subject to a subpart of that subject.

The film may or may not be notable, but the draft version at present does not show its notability. With a permanent, severe shortage of volunteer reviewers, it cannot be the reviewers' job to improve drafts, only to provide feedback. — Bilorv (talk) 17:12, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Good to know! There are multiple articles supprting that this film is the only film based on the death of Sahar Khodayari. So considering its mention on the page of Death of Sahar Khodayari - Wikipedia can serve as a source, and there are many awards and nominations listed on IMDb for it. I included three other links after rejection.

I can not add an English translation for it, because it is limited only to experienced editors like you.

Way to go, wish you the best!

زن، زندگی، آزادی Ziznews (talk) 17:21, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

@Ziznews: Wikipedia and IMDb are user-generated content, so not reliable sources. The typical way of showing notability for a topic like this is to add professional reviews of the film. If you think the problems have been addressed, you can resubmit and another reviewer will take a look. — Bilorv (talk) 18:15, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

The poster which you removed, belongs to its director, and he allowed it on Wikipedia.

Regards Ziznews (talk) 18:18, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

@Ziznews: for legal reasons, the copyright owner themselves would need to release it under a free license (such as Creative Commons) through a process like Release Generator for it to be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, which only hosts freely licensed content. The copyright owner would need to note that they are giving permission for free use outside of Wikipedia. On the other hand, copyrighted film posters can be used under fair use (and NFCC) after a draft is approved in some cases. — Bilorv (talk) 18:23, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Sanctioned Suicide

Hi. I noted that you voted against linking to Sanctioned Suicide in it's article due to "the potential for harm outweighs the encyclopedic value of having the link in the infobox"

I wanted to hear if you had similar stance towards Incels.is due to the similarity of the websites and due to both being founded and owned by (roughly) the same group of people Trade (talk) 21:09, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

@Trade: this is more difficult to say because the domain name is in the article title. Even if the article could reasonably be named something like Incels (website) (and I don't think it could unless it would be known by that name), I would have to spend time evaluating the website to reach a firm conclusion. — Bilorv (talk) 21:54, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, we might as well deal with the issue now rather than later Trade (talk) 22:03, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Do you mind providing some critique on this Draft

Hello sorry to bother you but you reviewed my previous articles, Beebo the God of War and Aruba. I took your advice on the articles and adjusted them but I was hoping you could provide some critique on a draft I have been co-writing for another episode of Legends of Tomorrow, titled Knocked Down, Knocked Up.

I want to make sure this is the best possible article for the subject to maximize its chances of aporval but if you want to take up this task its up too you.

Best wishes, OLI 22:17, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Definitely improving! I've approved the draft as a reviewer and rated it C-class.

A couple of reasons for this copyedit: Per MOS:CONTRACT, we don't use contractions like "isn't" in a formal encyclopedia. Price listings are very rarely included as they are ever-changing, vary by region, and Wikipedia is not a catalogue. Website names go in italics for news/magazine/opinion sources but not in many other cases. Amazon Web Services is not about the online arm of the company but about its technical infrastructure services to other businesses and websites. — Bilorv (talk) 08:36, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Immigrated/Emigrated

Hi, just getting my head round the change to the Nish Kumar article. Using myself as an example would it be correct when I lived in Germany to say "We emigrated" when visiting friends in the UK, and "we immigrated" when talking to friends from where we lived in Germany? And do you think the article is correct because it's about Nish Kumar who is British, not his father? Rankersbo (talk) 09:35, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

@Rankersbo: mainly I self-reverted as I wasn't confident that "immigrated" was wrong and my default shouldn't be to revert someone else's contributions. My understanding is that "emigrate" refers to leaving a country and "immigrate" refers to arriving: hence, someone who moved from the UK to Germany is "emigrating from the UK [to Germany]" and "immigrating to Germany [from the UK]". With that, "immigrated to the UK" would be correct, though "emigrated to the UK" may also correct because of the preposition "to" (not "from"). — Bilorv (talk) 17:29, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Ah OK thanks. Maybe I'm being oversensitive because of the tone these terms are used in. I think I will just have to digest and absorb your comment for now and see what I think in future. Rankersbo (talk) 11:29, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@Rankersbo: yes, my initial revert was partly on a knee-jerk reaction to the negative connotation of "immigrant" in the UK media, but I think the word is sufficiently neutral to use. — Bilorv (talk) 17:24, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Question from Gemstones69 (09:36, 19 May 2023)

Hi there,

I've actually logged on to change a photo on my own wikipedia page. It's an awful photo. I have many press photos where I have full consent from the photographer. Anything else I need to know before uploading/editing?

Best, Daniel --Gemstones69 (talk) 09:36, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

@Gemstones69: thanks for the question—it's an excellent one! Many images are only used as there is no freely licensed alternative, and sometimes volunteers will reach out to subjects or their agents to ask if they would be willing to donate any images.

Images in Wikipedia have to be freely licensed, which includes some Creative Commons licenses and public domain—this means you are giving permission for the image to be reused freely outside of Wikipedia. To release an image under such a license, you need to be the copyright holder, not just to have their permission. The copyright holder can go through this Release Generator and the images will be uploaded as quickly as volunteers can process it. From there, you could add the images to an article yourself (but will have to note conflict of interest guidelines), or you could let me know and I can do it.

Hope this helps! — Bilorv (talk) 17:05, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your response. I will try the release generator with a picture I took of myself on a timer. There shouldn't be any disputes there! 2A00:23C6:DC32:E201:6837:834F:8AE8:9D6A (talk) 10:38, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Draft:The Angry Black Girl and Her Monster

The editor behind this draft want it out of draft space before the film releases. Would you mind helping the editor by doing a draft review?--Trade (talk) 01:07, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

@Trade: an upcoming film must have garnered sufficiently much coverage that it would be notable even if the film was never released, per WP:CRYSTAL. Wikipedia's notability guidelines often clash with the interests of paid editors' bosses. I don't see particular reason to accept this specific draft, though I would have to look in more detail before declining. — Bilorv (talk) 18:46, 26 May 2023 (UTC)