Jump to content

User talk:Boothsift/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Đorđe Stojšić

[edit]

This is the disambiguation page I created a short time ago. They're both Serbian politicians, from the same city. The only reasonable choices for disambiguation were by year of birth or political party; in this case, I went with the former. I'd have no problem changing it to the latter, if you'd prefer, but "Serbian politician" isn't sufficient. CJCurrie (talk) 05:18, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@CJCurrie: Sorry!!! I'm new here, so I went looking around at bios so I thought that they don't include the birth/death dates in the title. My bad. --Boothsift (talk) 05:19, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Normally, they wouldn't (include the dates). And it's easily corrected ... CJCurrie (talk) 05:20, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to join WP:RRTF

[edit]

Hello, Boothsift! I'd like to invite you to join the Rick Riordan Task Force (formerly the "Percy Jackson" Task Force) of WikiProject Novels. We work to improve articles related to Rick Riordan and his books. Please, check out our project page or contact me to learn more! -- 2ReinreB2 (talk) 03:22, 26 October 2018 (UTC) [reply]
*Please note that membership is open only to full users. If you currently edit with an IP address, please consider creating an account today! We would love to have you.

@2ReinreB2: How do I join?--Boothsift (talk) 03:23, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Nangi devender reddy

[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Nangi devender reddy requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 06:22, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SshibumXZ: Why am I notified of this? I only moved the page. --Boothsift (talk) 06:23, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Boothsift, Twinkle, it's a recurring problem. I meant to tag the page for speedy deletion but in the meanwhile you moved the page. Sorry, I guess! Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 06:25, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
User:Boothsift - Welcome to reviewing. You are evidently relatively new to reviewing. If you move a page, and then someone else nominates it for deletion, then the page mover is identified as one of the creators of the page. This happens. Twinkle strikes again. Just ignore the message, unless you actually want to contest the deletion. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:41, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read both versions?

[edit]

I made three claims:

"Your version talks about magic mushrooms, parallel dimensions, spirits and extraterrestrial entities."

It does. Do you dispute this?

"Your version promotes casual usage of an illegal drug."

It does. Do you dispute this?

"Nobody with a sane mind believes it is less controversial."

Do you think that anyone with a sane mind can believe that magic mushrooms, parallel dimensions, spirits, extraterrestrial entities and promoting the casual usage of illegal drugs is less controversial than not doing it? --Risentheft (talk) 07:02, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Risentheft:Still, you violated Wikipedia policy by edit warring. If you would like to have them stop, please request a page protection. Otherwise, stop. --Me llamo @B00TH$!FT Chat With Me 07:05, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how to request a page protection.--Risentheft (talk) 07:10, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Risentheft: Please look at Wikipedia:Requests for Page Protection. Thank you--Me llamo @B00TH$!FT Chat With Me 07:26, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Shanghai Dianji University

[edit]

Just an FYI... The anon removing content from Shanghai Dianji University appears to be doing similar edits to other articles. See User:Jim1138/Single use IP for a list of articles that I put together. Cheers Jim1138 talk 12:03, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jim1138: Got it, thanks. --Me llamo @B00TH$!FT Chat With Me 22:52, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like most of the articles are locked. Probably some that have slipped through that nobody as bothered to restore. i.e. no EW and not obvious. Cheers Jim1138 talk 01:11, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Boothsift 2

[edit]

Did you create this account? I just want to make sure for your safety. Thanks.--Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 23:29, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Thegooduser:Yes I did. Cheers--Me llamo @B00TH$!FT Chat With Me 23:31, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sub Porn Picture

[edit]

Well done on catching the rather adult picture that someone had put in place of the sub, you beat me to it on reverting it.

Juanpumpchump (talk) 07:06, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Juanpumpchump: Thanks! Happy editing--Me llamo @B00TH$!FT Chat With Me 18:15, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well the couple in the substituted picture probably had a happy ending too - but not for this website!

Regards

Juanpumpchump (talk) 06:40, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Juanpumpchump: I agree! All the best--@Boothsift 06:14, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jaipur Pink Panthers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anup Kumar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Polo Forest

[edit]

Polo Forest article was mysteriously created due to Move of Polo forest. I don't know why that happened. You have nominated for CSD but I think history merge is needed leaving redirect. Regards,-Nizil (talk) 05:40, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Nizil Shah: How do I do that, also can you contest the Speedy Deletion for me? Thanks--@Boothsift 06:15, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Before I contaest CSD, the article is deleted. I have place history merge template on Polo forest.-Nizil (talk) 07:10, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that history merge is already performed. I will go for Capitalised title which you selected by moving page. Thank you for all help.-Nizil (talk) 07:13, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who have been to the Golden Gate Bridge has been nominated for discussion

[edit]

Category:Wikipedians who have been to the Golden Gate Bridge, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. VegaDark (talk) 09:56, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Colden

[edit]

Hi Boothsift, I wanted to let you know that I rolled back the disambiguation page Colden which included one of your edits. Your edit was quite correct but there was more, earlier, vandalism that was not fixed by your correction and yet more added after your edit. I reverted back to the last clean version to get rid of it all. Leschnei (talk) 01:48, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Leschnei: Okay, happy editing! --@Boothsift 05:04, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Muscovy duck

[edit]

Having not finished my revisions to the Muscovy duck (main) article yet, I undid your undo, in order to apply the last touches. You may wish to again revert the article, but I would encourage you to check first the article Domestic muscovy duck which contains all of the removed text, with only a few, slight edits. Not to mention, I cross-linked both articles. And thank you, by the way, for identifying my initial edits as "good faith".172.56.42.200 (talk) 00:57, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: I'm out in the boonies, working on a very slow connection, with a shared IP address. If my connection breaks (as it sometimes does) when it returns the IP address may differ. You may wish to leave any response here, rather than at 172.56.42.200.172.56.42.200 (talk) 01:10, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hatshepsut

[edit]

I reverted an obvious act of vandalism on the article Hatshepsut. The only change was that the name in the info box was changed back from "Hat" to "Hatshepsut". I do not understand your reason for undoing this. You say that I "messed up the link". What link? --Klausok (talk) 12:08, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Klausok: I actually don't know anymore. Maybe it was a glitch, because it showed the Ancient Egypt link being changed in your edit. It did not show the name being changed at all for me. So, it was weird. I have fixed the name though. --@Boothsift 23:37, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes reviewer granted

[edit]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Mz7 (talk) 20:49, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Joining the Rick Riordan Task Force

[edit]

Hi, so sorry I missed your question about how to join WP:RRTF. Just follow the link to our Active Members page and list your name. That's it!

Once again, sorry it took me so long to get back to you, and thanks for your interest! -- 2ReinreB2

@2ReinreB2: It's okay, I found out anyways :). Happy new year! --It's Boothsift 01:50, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Yongchun dialect

[edit]

Hi and thank you for your work at AfC. Just letting you know that I've accepted Draft:Yongchun dialect: regional dialects (or subdialects) are presumed notable, provided their existence can be verified. The draft cites what looks like a dissertation dedicated to an aspect of the dialect's grammar (not that there's no requirement for an article's sources to be easily accessible online), and a google search comes up with mentions in Enlgish-language sources as well.

Oh, and one more thing: if a user has resubmitted a draft that you've previously declined, and it looks like it should be declined again, it's usually best to leave that for another reviewer. One advantage of doing so is the appearance of fareness: if the draft is genuinely unsuitable then that verdict will carry greater weight in the eyes of the creator if it's come from more than one editor. – Uanfala (talk) 14:43, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Sector collapse) has been reviewed!

[edit]

Thanks for creating Sector collapse.

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

Interesting concept; thanks for creating this. I've made a few copy-edits which may be worth taking a look at. Some expansion could be nice, as the article is quite short at the moment but I feel it has quite a bit of potential.

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

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

SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 15:27, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SkyGazer 512: Thanks for your review! I haven't looked at the page in a while, but I'll try to expand it when time allows me to. Cheers--It's Boothsift 01:31, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, and thanks. It's by no means a requirement to expand it, but just a suggestion. --SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 03:40, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Seasonal Greetings

[edit]
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Boothsift, 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 2019.
Happy editing,
Everedux (talk) 15:06, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Accidentally undid your reversion

[edit]

Hi Boothsift! I'm pretty new at anti-vandalism and I accidently tried to revert a change at the same time as you, causing your change to be lost. With the help of Snowycats we were able to fix the mistake to how it was before, but I just wanted to let you know.

Edits in question

Perryprog (talk) 01:37, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback granted

[edit]

Hi Boothsift. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback should never be used to edit war.
  • If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
  • Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing!  ~~Swarm~~  {talk}  16:04, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Swarm: Thank you very much!--It's Boothsift 23:35, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

[edit]

One normally says "delete" instead of "support" at AfD because otherwise it's not clear what outcome you're supporting! The Drover's Wife (talk) 03:30, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@The Drover's Wife: My bad! I forgot. Happy editing--It's Boothsift 03:34, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Esme

[edit]

Hi Boothsift. I really appreciated your reply. I will work on creating articles better suited for Wikipedia. Thank you so much, Esmé. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esmé Aberdova (talk • contribs) 06:48, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Article reveiw!

[edit]

Hi Boothsift, I have recently submitted an article titled "The S.A.G.E Program" and I was wondering if you could reveiw it for me. I have submitted it already and as you were so very helpful last time, I would really appreciate if you reveiwed it. I have listened to your advice on how to create a good article and read information from links you gave me. This article is better quality than the last one and I have a reliable link as well. I would really appreciate it! Thanks, Ez. Esmé Aberdova (talk) 05:41, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed!

[edit]

Hi. I added the most helpful reference I could find. The topic I am writing about doesn't have many reliable references so I used the only two good ones I could find. If you could have a look at the new version that would be great! Cheers, Esmé. Esmé Aberdova (talk) 06:52, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Esmé Aberdova: Then, it may not be notable. I'll take a look. --It's Boothsift 06:53, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Updated my article based on your valuable inputs, dear @Boothsift

[edit]

Appreciate your taking time to help me with your comments, dear @Boothsift! Despite my sincere efforts in going through guidelines info, I find it difficult to post updates to my submitted article. The picture and the comments submitted to be a part as an inset in my submitted article was "deleted" by a reviewer. I seek your guidance and help how to upload/add the picture of my own creation with relevant info to appear in the inset. Please help me with specific guidelines. Thanks Murugesan Ramalingam — Preceding unsigned comment added by Murugesan Ramalingam (talk • contribs) 07:36, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Murugesan Ramalingam: What article are you referring to? --It's Boothsift 07:42, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New page reviewer granted

[edit]

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

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

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. ~Swarm~ {talk} 23:38, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Swarm: Thank you so much!!! --It's Boothsift 05:31, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

teahouse invites for obvious WP:ORGNAME violations

[edit]

This is just a little pet peeve of mine, and not a matter of policy. I just think it looks bad to invite someone to the Teahouse when declining their AFC submission when you know you are going to turn right around report them at UAA for their username. It sends a very inconsistent message to the user. I believe there is a button you can click when declining the submission to omit the Teahouse invite. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:03, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Beeblebrox: There is a button, however I tend to leave it checked. This may be the reason why an invitation was sent since I simply forgot to uncheck the button. Anyways, thank you for reminding me. Happy editing --The One and Only Boothsift 00:28, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NOTICE

[edit]

Just want everybody to know, I know how to write an article. For example, recently many people are pinning me as the author of some random article. Please double check and tell the ACTUAL author instead, as I may have zero knowledge of the article or subject whatsoever. --The One and Only Boothsift 05:32, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Boothsift, would you mind reviewing this article. Thanks in advance.--Joseph 03:35, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I didn't accept it, but I suggest using better resources. --The One and Only Boothsift 05:06, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:Olivia browny

[edit]

A tag has been placed on User talk:Olivia browny requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Theroadislong (talk) 17:28, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Theroadislong: I won't stop you :). --The One and Only Boothsift 21:37, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Could you find time to review the new article, Daniel McGirt?

[edit]

Hi, Boothsift. You reviewed the article I created, Cubo Line; could you possibly find time to review the new article I've created, Daniel McGirt? Thank you, in any case. Carlstak (talk) 00:08, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Carlstak: If you need any more help, feel free to ask me. --The One and Only Boothsift 21:38, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. Regards, Carlstak (talk) 23:53, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Girella zebra (Zebrafish)

[edit]

Hallo Boothsift, I came across this while stub-sorting and I see you had moved it from draft. There were a couple of problems:

  1. No need for disambiguated title - it should have replaced the existing redirect to Girella. I've now put in a WP:RM to get it moved to the right title
  2. One of the references (no.3 in this version) was the sort of garble which happens easily when you copy something from a website and it picks up much more text than you intended, but either you or the original editor should have spotted it and fixed it. Do you need to slow down a bit on your AFC work, I wonder? Happy Editing. PamD 09:11, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@PamD: Thank you for pointing those out. I agree I should slow down more, since I didn't look at either the title or the references. Maybe it was due to exhaustion? I don't know, but I'll be more careful at AfC now. --The One and Only Boothsift 23:54, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

[edit]

Hi, I'm Ammarpad. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, André Carreiras, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

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

–Ammarpad (talk) 05:45, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ammarpad: Forgot to press uncheck, thanks anyways. --The One and Only Boothsift 05:50, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Shaun Yeo

[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Shaun Yeo requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from cartoons.org.nz/cartoonists/shaun-yeo. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. SITH (talk) 17:56, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@StraussInTheHouse: Why was I notified?--The One and Only Boothsift 23:38, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is because you moved the page, and so when Twinkle went to parse out who the original author was it seemed you created the page. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:42, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Ctenosaura nolascensis) has been reviewed!

[edit]

Thanks for creating Ctenosaura nolascensis.

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

Thank you for creating these recent new pages. Please would you take a little more care in giving the url to the correct entry on the IUCN database (i.e. https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/174477/1414514), and not just to the IUCN homepage? This allows users to verify the conservation status that you've included. Thanks.

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

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

Nick Moyes (talk) 01:06, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick Moyes:I believe I did put the right link. It worked for me. As a fellow new page reviewer, I believe that pressing on the link may be helpful.Hmmmm that's weird, I copy pasted the right url, maybe something weird happened. --The One and Only Boothsift 01:40, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Previous Comments

[edit]

Hi Boothsift, this is not content I will be adding but I have been working to fulfill my assignments for a WikiEdu course I am taking and this is to help prepare the article I am editing. Here is a link if you would like to review look this over: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/University_at_Albany,_SUNY/Information_Literacy_in_the_Humanities_and_Arts_(8W1_Spring_2019) Thanks and take care Beansie813 (talk) 02:38, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Beansie813: AfC is an article creating process. The drafts are there so they may be accepted and they become an article after. Your draft was not an article, if you want to know what an article looks like, take a look at the Featured article. So since you submitted it at AfC, that means you wanted it to be an article regardless of your true motives. --The One and Only Boothsift 03:04, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

[edit]

Thanks for reviewing Lucky (2019 film), Boothsift.

PamD has gone over this page again and marked it as unpatrolled. Their note is:

Please add some text to the article - an infobox alone is not enough.

Please contact PamD for any further query. Thanks.

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

PamD 23:57, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@PamD: Thanks for catching that, I always forget to press unreview. Anyways, it's not my article and I know nothing about the topic, so I'll leave it to the author to add more text :). Happy editing--The One and Only Boothsift 00:15, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request for assistance on AfC submission by The Navigators - Draft Safety sign

[edit]

Regarding AfC rejection of: Draft:Safety_sign.

I'm appealing this decision due to the following conversations that it was concluded if I could make the improve the article a bit more from the original submission, and put together a split proposal to take non-traffic warning signs from the existing Warning sign article, this would be a suitable article. I feel I have done both of those things.

Links to relevant conversations:

If there is something else that is wrong, please specify in more detail. Thank you.--The Navigators (talk)-May British Rail Rest in Peace. 04:58, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@The Navigators: You are suggesting a merge/split, that would a good idea. Do you want me to ask AngusWOOF?--The One and Only Boothsift 05:00, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Thank you.--The Navigators (talk)-May British Rail Rest in Peace. 06:15, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@The Navigators: The discussion seems to be idle at the moment.--The One and Only Boothsift 03:33, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Could you clarify which discussion? Our discussion here, the discussion at User:AngusWOOF, or the 'Warning sign' Splitting proposal?--The Navigators (talk)-May British Rail Rest in Peace. 06:11, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@The Navigators: The proposal. I believe that the last edit was in November 2018. --The One and Only Boothsift 06:37, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My last edit to it was when I updated it to have a new link to the archived discussion on 7 January 2019, but some users gave feedback on it since then, between 1 - 7 March 2019. For whatever reason the talk page just doesn't get much attention even with the split discussion notices on it.--The Navigators (talk)-May British Rail Rest in Peace. 09:59, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@The Navigators: Ah, I probably looked at some other discussion on accident. My apologies--The One and Only Boothsift 22:51, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's cool. Is there anything you need me to do while you discuss things with AngusWOOF?--The Navigators (talk)-May British Rail Rest in Peace. 23:36, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No. I was busy, I'll discuss with him later when I have more time. Happy editing --The One and Only Boothsift 00:01, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Assessments

[edit]
It's pretty much done.--BoothSift 04:49, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

When creating an article, please add class and importance assessments to the Wikiproject template on the talk page. For example, Talk:Lithops otzeniana needed |class=stub|importance=low. Abductive (reasoning) 05:03, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Abductive: I did not create the article and I am not part of WikiProjects Plants nor am I familiar with plants therefore I did not want to add an importance or class in case I mess something up. Cheers--The One and Only Boothsift 05:28, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, but you edited the article and you created the talk page. In any case, have confidence. Any article created these days on a species is going to be Low-importance and probably a Stub. Just guess, that's what we're all doing. Abductive (reasoning) 05:32, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Abductive: Actually, if I did put it in, most likely somebody will come here, telling me all the things I forgot to do or did wrong. This has happened a lot recently for small errors like forgetting to remove some text or putting it in the wrong category. Everyone makes mistakes and I am not perfect, and after a long day, mistakes could become more frequent. Many people also assume I have little knowledge about creating/editing articles and I only revert vandalism and they want to come in and point out everything I did wrong. In fact, I have made 40+ articles, is a new page reviewer, AfC reviewer, and I have worked with talk pages countless times before. This is just a small error on my part. Maybe that sounded harsh, for that I sincerely apologize. Happy editing--The One and Only Boothsift 05:41, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) @Abductive: I'm with Boothsift on this one: I'll create a talk page and add an appropriate project banner or several, but will leave it to those involved in the projects, or those with the confidence (possibly misguided) to be sure that they're assessing appropriately, to evaluate for stub/start etc and for importance. I've got as far as adding "living=yes|listas=Bloggs, Jane" to {{WP Bio}}, but beyond that I don't go. Empty fields are better than incorrectly completed fields. PamD 09:39, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, but I'll say it again. New articles in mature topic fields (basically everything on Wikipedia except breaking news stories) are easy to assess. They are Low-importance, because if they were higher the article would have already been written, and their classes can be guessed by length alone. Instead of templating article talk pages where you are not sure, consider telling the articles' authors on their talk pages to do it. Abductive (reasoning) 12:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Abductive: Did someone appoint you to tell me stuff I already know? Take a look at my past contributions please. I'm sorry that I'm human and I forgot to do something once. --The One and Only Boothsift 22:56, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

NPR Newsletter No.17

[edit]

Hello Boothsift,

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

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

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

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

The flying stone!

[edit]

You will read my answer in the Commons discussion. I am convinced that through this debate (which is going well) we have a seed that can germinate and become something big. You are a member of WikiProject United States so contact the author by showing him the problem and tell him that it is because we love his work that we want to make it known. Thank you for the reward ... --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:01, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My draft

[edit]

Xiamen Bridge, added more references, that aren't connected to the topic. While you're at it mind also reviewing Jimei Bridge? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (talk) 14:05, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Woshiyiweizhongguoren:  Done I see you made it into an article, that is not really a good idea. I suggest deleting the article and improve the draft then I'll review it and possibly accept it. That way you don't cheat your way out of AfC and it meets community guidelines. If you don't want to, do you wish for me to review your article? --BoothSift 03:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I guess the damage has already been done, sorry. I'll make up for this by going through the draft process for my next article Yanwu Bridge instead of creating it directly. You can review my existing articles if you want. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 10:49, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My draft

[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jimei_Bridge; I replaced two of the links, is it good to go now? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (talk) 00:55, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My submission - Affluentitis

[edit]

Hi Boothshift,

Thanks for the quick response. I am not at all disappointed. If this term gets used in the future, (who knows?) I hope the origin will be attributed to me.

Keep up the good work.

Regards,

Rshas3 (talk) 02:20, 25 March 2019 (UTC) rshas3[reply]

Rajan Shastri

@Rshas3: Why would the origin be attributed to you? --BoothSift 03:21, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 March 2019

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Article drafted

[edit]

Your recent article that I nominated for deletion is drafted instead, either way the csd is obviously not intended for you Daiyusha (talk) 18:07, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Maratus combustus) has been reviewed!

[edit]

Thanks for creating Maratus combustus.

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

Nice Work!

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

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

Hughesdarren (talk) 06:22, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your quick review :)

[edit]

Thank you so much for your lightening speed review :) I was still making typo corrections.

"This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner."

I'm new to Wikipedia, so please bear with me.

Can you please help me understand how I did not write the topic from a neutral POV? I simply reported the actual data from the Cook study, and then I included content from both proponents and opponents to the Cook study results. How is me reporting on the data of the study not neutral, and how does it include my opinions (it does not). It does contain opinions from both proponents and opponents of the Cook Study conclusions, but that is the whole point and topic of this article.

Also, none of this content is original research. I have properly cited each and every research point, none of it from me or original on my part.

Honestly, I'm dumbfounded with your characterization of this article being one-sided, considering every single other Wikipedia article on the related subjects I cited is absolutely one-sided and are proponents of the Cook study results. Honestly, you're bursting my bubble that Wikipedia is fair and balanced and really wants new contributors, and I sincerely hope you can divest me of that thought.

Thank you again ConcernedCitizenUSA April 21 2019 22:16

@ConcernedCitizenUSA: It was neutral, however my emphasis was on the encyclopedia part. An article is not a summary of a report, neither should the headings be a question and you don't have to explain what you are going to talk about. Therefore, I was going for that it reads more like an essay than an article. --BoothSift 05:22, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you have been blocked for sockpuppetry, then your article is a violation itself. --BoothSift 05:23, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
First, thank you for your quick response! I'm glad you agree my article is neutral. Your concern is that it reads too much like an essay and you gave examples, so I will read up more on that subject as it relates to Wikipedia and then see how I can make it read less like an essay, and then resubmit it. I appreciate that advice! As for me being blocked for being a sockpuppet, with all due respect, you are mistaken (please recheck that). I was temporarily blocked for being part of an "edit war". I was also briefly investigated for being a sockpuppet but I believe that was already cleared up as someone else trying to impersonate me and get me in trouble. ConcernedCitizenUSA April 21, 2019 10:36PM (PST)
@ConcernedCitizenUSA: My bad--BoothSift 05:45, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
ConcernedCitizenUSA was blocked for a routine 3RR violation, that's all. As they note, somebody tried to set them up with a spurious sockpuppet accoount - happily, that effort failed. Acroterion (talk) 22:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request templates

[edit]

FYI, you're supposed to use Template:ESp, Template:EEp and related templates when answering edit requests, not the standard "Done", "Not done", "Partly done" et cetera. The process is somewhat simpler that way. Geolodus (talk) 06:56, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Boothsift/Archive_2&oldid=1184169468"