Jump to content

User talk:Cremastra/Archive 2

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

About https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Omenya

Good morning, I've asked other users to help me remove the banner of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Omenya, you've put up by correcting the text. They've done what they can, but I don't understand how I can remove the banner. Videke (talk) 17:31, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, @Videke, I'm happy to help! By "remove the banner", do you mean how to manually remove it (meaning the problems have been fixed), or how to fix the problems I tagged it for ("an excessive number of citations")? Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 17:36, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick answers, I was just asking how I could solve the problem, so does that mean that the sources I quoted were too many on the article, so I'd have to reduce the links? mean ("an excessive number of citations")? Videke (talk) 17:45, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
Sort of. This is minor issue, but the main point here is that there are too many citations, cluttering up the text- it's citation overkill. The problem can be fixed two ways: 1) removing unnecessary citations- it's far better to have one or two really good sources than a bunch of mediocre ones- quality over quantity is the key here. 2) If all these citations are necessary to support the text, then they can be merged together. (see Help:Citation merging) Again, it's a relatively minor issue- don't panic. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 18:21, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
I've got it, the text seems to be full of quotes, I'm going to look at everything again and try to fix them by only quoting useful sources...
I'll let you know when I've finished, thank you, I'm not panicking, thank you for reassuring me. Videke (talk) 21:30, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
I've read the document to help me with this problem but I don't know what to do; I've tried to solve the reference lists, see if it's well done in the opposite case, could you do it for me, as I'm a novice in the English community.
thank you very much Edward-Woodrow for resolving it for me please Videke (talk) 21:36, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
"I've tried to solve the reference lists, see if it's well done in the opposite case" - I don't understand what you mean. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 21:43, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
It seems you're also active on french wikipedia (fr:Utilisateur:Videke) I can try to explain the problem in French, if translation is why I'm having difficulty understanding you. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 21:46, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
yes we don't speak french or portuguese, i could understand you better in french Videke (talk) 22:04, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

French: D'accord. Le problème est que l'article as tros de rĂŠferences ([1]), qui encombrent le texte. Tu peut rĂŠsoudre le problème par 1) enlèver les rĂŠferences non-essentielles- un bon rĂŠference est meilleur que plusieurs de qualitĂŠ moyen; 2) si tous les sources sont nĂŠcessaires pour supporter les contenus, tu peut fusionner plusieurs rĂŠferences comme ça: [2] (expliquĂŠ Ă  Help:Citation Merging) Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 22:11, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ C'est qu'un example.
  2. ^ Cette phrase est supportĂŠ par les rĂŠferences suivants:
    • "Example".
    • "Example".
    • "Example".

Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 22:11, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

bonjour , d'accord oui j'ai compris maintenant. merci beaucoup Videke (talk) 05:58, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
Excellent! Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 12:50, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

"Article Update: Not an Orphan! 📚"

Jejeki (talk) 16:10, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Are you referring to Shallipopi? It is called an "orphan" because no other articles link to it. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:14, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
Jejeki (talk) 16:19, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
Jejeki (talk) 16:57, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
Jejeki (talk) 16:59, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

A message from Sjl197

sorry we clashed a bit there on Adira - i'm slow as still on the basics Sjl197 (talk) 19:08, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

If you're referring to the edit conflict- no worries. Thanks for your work on the article! Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 19:44, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Subject: Requesting Review for Draft:Juiceslf

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to kindly request a review of a draft I have created titled "Juiceslf - Nigerian Rapper, Singer, and Songwriter." I believe this draft meets the notability criteria and provides valuable information about this talented artist in the Nigerian music industry.

The draft highlights Juiceslf's background, career, notable releases, and his impact on the music scene. It also includes references to reliable sources that support the information presented.

I have put significant effort into crafting this draft and adhering to Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. I believe Juiceslf's story deserves to be shared with the larger online community, contributing to the diversity of musical profiles on the platform.

I kindly request that you review the draft at your earliest convenience and provide any feedback or guidance for improvement. I look forward to your expert assessment and assistance in bringing this article to Wikipedia's readership.

Thank you for your time and consideration. If you require any further information or have any questions, please do not hesitate to reach out.

Best regards, 

Jejeki (talk) 21:52, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
Good day, and thank-you for your contributions. However, to be fair to all draft creators, I won't review submissions on request, but just pick some randomly. If I accepted this request, this would be unfair to the other thousands of drafts awaiting our attention. Cheers, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 22:15, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Requesting Review for Draft: Musiliu Raji

I'm rather surprised that you have not responded to my reply from your last review stating that this draft does not adhere to some of Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. I was able to provide examples of similar articles of public figures and notable personalities that mimic exactly what was being portrayed about this individual and his philanthropic records that have made it on every Wikipedia page. We keep wondering why these other articles were accepted and met all criteria and this one hasn't. Every reference used and sources included came from his original archive that he granted permission to be used and links had been attached thus far. We are indeed out of options here and, for lack of better terms, frustrated with the entire process. We are not looking to profit in any way, shape or form from any of this. The main objective is to let the world know that there are people out there who may not be the Bill Gates, Warren Buffets, Elon Musks of this world but have given their time and life in service to so many and they do not ask anything back in return. Such individuals are worthy of recognition and praise and this platform can create a space and audience for them.

Thanks for your time and attention to this. Please let us know in due time what can be done to in this regard. Quoraji (talk) 23:32, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I am sorry that you are disappointed in the Articles for Creation process. However, please bear in mind that Articles for Creation reviewers are volunteers. We pick submissions to review at random. Thus, it would be unfair for me to review or re-review a draft on request- it would be unfair to the other thousands of submissions. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 23:40, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

SAT

Hey, you recently reverted an edit of mine because of citations but I dont see what to cite as I was removing something not adding, also with regards to the Cyprus landing, its generally referred to as the invasion of Cyprus. 87.228.137.42 (talk) 16:10, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

I assume you're referring to Underwater Offence (Turkish Armed Forces). You removed content without providing a source to back your claim that it was a ‎Inaccurate description of the event. If you believe the article to be innacurate, feel free to raise the issue on the article talk page, where you can discuss the article with other editors and reach consensus. Thank-you, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:14, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
I mean, you could just look at the Imia page and see that its version of events and the ones claimed on the Underwater Offence one clearly dont match and the sources on the Imia page are also more reliable so I guess id just be transferring data from one to the other. 87.228.137.42 (talk) 16:18, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Again, if you have concerns, raise them at the article talk page. I just happened to come across your edit, I have no expertise in this area. Editors monitoring the talk page may. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:21, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Yegor Letov

Hi. What evidence is here for the name to misspelled? It seems to me to be an accurate transliteration. His name was not "Игорь" but "Егор". See [1] and [2]. Graham Beards (talk) 16:54, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Ah yes, I see. My apologies, I'll revert my edits. "Egor" is used in most of the article so I assumed that that was the correct spelling. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:57, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Review of draft: Adonis Kapsalis - not thorough

Hey, you recently reviewed a new page and it seems based on the comments left it wasn’t thoroughly reviewed. The sources provided are legitimate and fully verifiable. “Greek Reporter” is one of the biggest news organisations for Greeks worldwide, as is “Proto Thema” and “Playboy GR”. Others you’d have to be familiar with Greek news networks. Those were articles written specifically & independently about this person and not passing mentions. Some references added by various users seem to be passing mentions however those should not negate the major verifiable ones. Thank you GP75S (talk) 05:53, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

@GP75S: Sorry for the delay, I was out of town for a while. I'll look into this today if I can. Cheers, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 13:36, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
It looks like the problem is less verifiability/reliability and more indication of notability. (however, there are reliability concerns; Facebook &IMDb aren't reliable sources) I'll create a source analysis table in a little while. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 14:06, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Hey thanks for the reply. That’s great. Similar references (number of online articles / by same publications) were used for other Greek actor/actress pages I’ve contributed to and already approved & published. The facebook page is an official verified University account and Playboy Greece is in Greek and print edition. The less reliable ones can just be removed. GP75S (talk) 15:01, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
If you believe the problems have been fixed, you can resubmit and another reviewer will assess it. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 22:55, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Are you still creating a source analysis table? Since you previously stated it’s not an issue with verifiability/reliability can you remove the comment previously added? Additionally, wikipedia states that a facebook page is acceptable when it’s an official organisation page. Cheers, G GP75S (talk) 08:56, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Well, I see you've submitted it for review, so I don't think a source analysis table is really necessary anymore. The next reviewer will decide. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 12:21, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive:
  • On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded.
  • Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate:
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t ¡ c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

July 2023 GOCE drive awards

The Cleanup Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to Edward-Woodrow for copy edits totaling over 12,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE July 2023 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Dhtwiki (talk) 21:28, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Guild of Copy Editors Leaderboard Award: Total Articles, 4th Place
This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Edward-Woodrow for copyediting 18 articles during the GOCE July 2023 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Dhtwiki (talk) 21:28, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

A message from 109.112.150.204

109.112.150.204 (talk) 22:57, 6 August 2023 (UTC) The information about Leonardo Self Portait in english version of Wikipedia are old and incorrect. New material studied confirm the realization of the drawing around 1517-1518, when Leoardo was in France. There is a lot of new material about this topic in italian language. The Royal Library calls it Self-Portrait. Carlo Pedretti has always described it as Self-Portrait. Wikipedia cannot exclude the most up-to-date studies on the drawings. We apologize for the sincerity, but the elimination of bibliographic updates published by important Italian institutions is misleading, partial and ignorant and very serious.

If you have concerns, you can raise the issue on the talk page or at least support your changes with reliable sources. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 23:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Category:Bronco (band) has been nominated for renaming

Category:Bronco (band) has been nominated for 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. (CC) Tbhotch™ 00:11, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Interracial mating RfD

Hey there. Just wanted to ask why did you close this discussion as "keep" when there's a clear consensus for retargeting? CycloneYoris talk! 22:57, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Whoops... I meant to retarget it to the suggested target. I have no idea what happened. My apologies. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 22:59, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Little Ukraine/ The Russian Room

Hello Edward-Woodrow,

Concerning your proD of the article about Little Ukraine, what about redirecting the page to Yanina Studilina, the lead actress? Up to you, of course. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:32, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mushy Yank: I generally don't like redirecting pages like that – I think it's WP:ASTONISHing and misleading for the reader, since there's no actual information about Little Ukraine at that article, apart from the fact that she was the lead actress. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 18:40, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. All right, no problem! When it's the lead role or that the only sources deal with a given actor/actress or when her/his filmography mentions it, I don't think it is that misleading. Anyway, I won't contest this ProD as I thought that, unless reviews were presented (with the alternative title (+The), who knows?), only that particular redirect might be OK. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:49, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

RfD clerking

Hey Edward, I appreciate your clerking at RfD (it can always use more help), but I saw a few things that I would like to point out:

  • Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 12#Russian bond is a fifth relist, which is definitely the most I've ever seen. WP:RELIST advises that: Relisting debates repeatedly in the hope of getting sufficient participation is not recommended, and while having a deletion notice on a page is not harmful, its presence over several weeks can become disheartening for its editors. Therefore, in general, debates should not be relisted more than twice. Users relisting a debate for a third (or further) time, or relisting a debate with a substantial number of commenters, should write a short explanation either within the {{relist}} template, or in addition to it, on why they did not consider the debate sufficient. Saying "Last try..." does not explain why the debate is not sufficient. If there are no new comments since a previous relist, that is a good sign that it is time for closure.
  • Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 12#Talk:Zionism, race and genetics/Archive 2 is a premature close. RfD's should not be closed simply upon tagging due to the chance of being declined and in case anyone wants to discuss it further in the meantime. That being said, this one is pretty obvious and I plan to action it if someone else doesn't get around to it first.
  • Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 12#Alonsomania shouldn't be relisted without comment explaining why discussion should be prolonged. Per WP:RGUIDE, If a good-faith RfD nomination proposes to delete a redirect and has no discussion after at least 7 days, the default result is delete. I can see a case for giving this one a relist due to the fact that it's a redirect from merge so a closer may desire a bit of extra time for editors to look over the underlying content, but that should ideally be explained in a relist comment.

I hope this doesn't sound too nitpicky because none of these are really that big of a deal. I just thought it would be helpful to keep some things in mind when deciding what to do with a discussion. Thanks again for your participation in RfD and hope to continue to see you around! -- Tavix (talk) 22:27, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the guidance! Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 22:38, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Varanus salvadorii

Hey there, I noticed you put out a notice to move Varanus salvadorii to Crocodile monitor. It seems to me that such a move is not completely uncontroversial due to the multiplicity of common names, and probably needs to go through Wikipedia:Requested moves instead. Because of this, I reverted the talk page move and reverted the cut and paste move that had already been done. Let me know if you have any questions or concerns. bibliomaniac15 21:39, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

@Bibliomaniac15: I put a notice requesting a histmerge in the wake of the cut-and-paste move, I didn't have anything to do with the move beforehand. I did move Talk:Varanus salvadorii to Talk:Crocodile monitor because User:Ala culta did not do so. User:Ala culta was responible for the cut-and-paste move; I was not involved outside of cleanup, and really don't hold an opinion on the move. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 00:13, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, I left a notice on Ala culta's talk about their initial action being out of process. Just something to keep in mind about cleanup for next time. Thanks! bibliomaniac15 05:49, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

"Biden Crime Family" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Biden Crime Family has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 14 § Biden Crime Family until a consensus is reached. -- Tavix (talk) 00:23, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

A message from Chlopim

Hello! Totally random message but I just wanted to say that I am extremely grateful for the positive tone you often seem to use on Wikipedia. It's not often that I read random talk pages and come across a user as kind as you! Just wanted to remind you that it is valued (at least by me) and is worth your time to be nice. Have a wonderful day! Chlopim (talk) 19:10, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Oh! Thank-you very much! Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 19:31, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Fix 250 citation errors

Soooo...I just fixed a template that was causing archive date errors on 200~ cephalopod pages. Does that count as 200~ or 1? It feels like it shouldn't count as 200 since it was a 5 minute fix. ~ Argenti Aertheri(Chat?) 10:47, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Hmm... that's definitely an important fix, and good job finding the root of the problem, but you're right, it is just a five-minute fix. I'll see... Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 12:33, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
A minor reward for a minor fix! Thanks ~ Argenti Aertheri(Chat?) 13:31, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2023 August 10#File:Czech Republic national football team logo.svg

I think you misinterpreted my FFD as a deletion request and hence closed it prematurely as keep. Neither keep nor delete were possible results given my rationale. A possible result would've been "Keep in article A, remove from article B, C and D". Is it possible to undo a close or do I just make a new FFD? You were not the only one who misinterpreted it so I don't blame you for it, I apparently should have worded my rationale more clearly. Jonteemil (talk) 13:38, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Ah, I see (the "keep" !vote confused me as well). I'm happy to withdraw my closure, but I don't know if that's allowed. However, since it seems that withdrawing the close would be the clear action to take, I'll invoke IAR and just go ahead. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 14:46, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you and happy editing. Jonteemil (talk) 15:15, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Fix 400 citation errors

Hello Edward-Woodrow,

I just wanted to let you know that I started your listing at the reward board, because I was confused about whether I had to tell you that I started. Good day. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 02:13, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Oh; it's fine, you don't have to tell me if you started: I'll give out the award multiple times, just increasing the number of fixes each time. Thanks for your time! Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 13:06, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Section of the complaint

Hello. I agree in every way to what you are saying with your open letter to the Wikimedia foundation. But that rather critical reference to 2018 made me think of something. And I looked it up again as memory might be playing games with me. But no, there was no section where people could critique and disagree with the letter’s message and implications. While it might seem good to have such a section, the ones who are opposed to the message can easily express themselves somewhere else then on the message itself. That is why I am suggesting you to remove that section completely, as it doesn’t give a new opinion on the debate and only makes it so that the discussion is leaning toward the opposite side. There is more then enough support for the funds (on another note that also means way less support for this then in 2018, where the debated subject had much more people willing to sign). It still remains your decision, obviously, so make of it what you will. But in my opinion the fact that this section exists will even more diminish the number of signatures. Reman Empire (talk) 18:13, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Well, it's still in the draft stage, and the wording could change, but I was hoping to move it to WP:VPM soon so we can get actual signatures (as opposed to "interested parties") Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 18:15, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi Reman Empire: I've boldly moved to the Village Pump (1), we'll see how that goes. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 18:21, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
It’s your draft so I’m leaving it to you. But I think we should put that it’s on the village pump now on it. I don’t think we should remove it as I and several others already spread messages about it on talk pages, and it would be a lot of work redoing that know. Reman Empire (talk) 18:37, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
I've pulled the letter from VPM for now, per BilledMammal's reasoning (see the section below) Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 18:38, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Letter to the WMF

Hey,

I was hoping you could pull the letter for now? I would prefer to work out a broader and more coordinated plan at User_talk:BilledMammal/2023_Fundraising_RfC first. Part of the intent there is to discuss grants, but with specific grievances and specific requests, and I would rather not exhaust the community with two separate village pump discussions on that.

I would also compare it to this letter, sent in 2022, that did get results. In comparison to that, I don't believe yours is ready to ask for signatures. BilledMammal (talk) 18:22, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes; let's get our act together and make sure we cover everything we need to in a way that's likely to get widespread agreement. Although it would be wonderful if the WMF reformed itself this evening, there's no particular deadline. Certes (talk) 18:40, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Question about edit to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Header

Hi, I noticed that a few days ago that you removed part of the header to the teahouse with that said skip to the bottom. I understand an argument that it was redundant but you didn't provide a reasoning to your edit so I reverted it. I'm open to discussion though. Esolo5002 (talk) 19:42, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, the edit summary I entered didn't show for some reason. The link doesn't work; even after an attempted fix to re-insert the anchor. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 19:43, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
I'll revert it back, but was working perfectly fine for me when I just tested it. Esolo5002 (talk) 22:02, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Hmm... I tested to make sure that the error was still there. The link didn't work– there's no "footer-info" anchor. Maybe we should raise this at WP:VPT? Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 22:17, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Sounds good. Esolo5002 (talk) 22:20, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Customs redirects RfD

I saw that you closed this RfD yesterday. I’m just leaving you a message because I noticed that you had participated in the discussion earlier on, and so (if I’m understanding the guidelines correctly), it occurred to me that it could be seen as a closer being involved. I apologise if I’ve missed or misunderstood anything, as I’m quite new to editing Wikipedia, but I thought I should let you know just in case. (To be clear, I didn’t take part in this discussion and don’t have an opinion on it; I just noticed it and thought I should let you know.)

Best, A smart kitten (talk) 14:53, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

@A smart kitten: Yes, I did take part in the discussion earlier, and it was a WP:INVOLVED close. However, the "no consensus/trainwreck" conclusion was pretty clear, and given the fact that I can't even remember what I !voted, I clearly wasn't that invested or involved. The discussion had been open for nearly three months, and in my view clearly wasn't going anywhere. So I invoked WP:IAR and closed it. If you believe my close was non-neutral, or could use with further scrutiny, feel free to revert it or discuss it at WT:RFD. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 14:59, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your response, and sorry if my last message came across badly. To be honest, I more just wanted to let you know in case it was an accidental INVOLVED close (ie, if you’d forgotten you’d taken part) that you wouldn’t have otherwise made. Just to be clear, I have no intention myself of taking this anywhere else, and I’m happy to defer to your judgement on the matter. All the best :) A smart kitten (talk) 15:07, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

I've fixed 400 citations errors.

Whew! I've finished about 400, by my count. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 00:03, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Well done! Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 00:04, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Category:Attacks in France in the 2010s

I've renamed Category:Attacks in France in the 2010s as requested, reparented it, and populated it from nearby categories.

Please add some siblings for other decades. – Fayenatic London 16:15, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. I'll work on that. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:17, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
Cheers. Feel free to set up Category:Attacks in France by decade once there are a few subcats to put in it. – Fayenatic London 16:19, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

A message from RERGaming123

I am RER, I made an edit on Mujaddid Alf Sani Page By Changing His Portrait To Calligraphic Representation. I am sorry If I Made A Mistake But I Recommend Not To Put Image Of Religious figures Of Islam Like Muhammad SAW or In This Case Mujaddid Alf Sani. The Muslims Get Very Angry About This Because it's against Their Laws And Many Countries Don't accept The Images — Preceding unsigned comment added by RERGaming123 (talk • contribs) 16:00, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

@RERGaming123: I understand your concern, but Wikipedia does not censor potentially controversial or offensive images. Here's what that guideline says: Wikipedia may contain content that some readers consider objectionable or offensive‍—‌even exceedingly so. Attempting to ensure that articles and images will be acceptable to all readers, or will adhere to general social or religious norms, is incompatible with the purposes of an encyclopedia. WP:OM also says Wikipedia editors should not remove material solely because it may be offensive, unpleasant, or unsuitable for some readers. Thank-you. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:07, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Also, please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your username, a link to your talk page, and a timestamp, like this: Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:08, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
and sorry for not signing RERGaming123 (talk) 16:15, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Wouldn't it be better if it's good for everyone. Let's not start a debate and I am just asking you so it's good for all readers. I also understand your concern but it's controversial to more than 1.9 billion users. Changing one image to calligraphy will not affect anything RERGaming123 (talk) 16:10, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
You can ask for help or discuss the issue at the Teahouse, a friendly forum for new users, where other editors will give their input. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 17:01, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Bagasara Taluka

Can you check now? DilipSpatel (talk) 14:15, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

You can submit the draft for review (click the big blue button), and another reviewer will look at it. Please be patient, there are 4000 drafts waiting for our attention. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 14:18, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Banded palm civet

The article Banded palm civet you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Banded palm civet for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of AryKun -- AryKun (talk) 15:02, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you!

A sincere thanks for your removal at ANI. It's always hard to know the minds of other people, and maybe I was totally off base in my request, but I appreciate that at least one person in the discussion took a critical comment well :). Not that your fundamental observation was unreasonable -- there's are reasons we have WP:OWN, and one of them is to prevent people from getting so emotionally involved in protecting 'their' articles from any perceived slight. So thanks again, and happy editing! JBL (talk) 00:57, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 August 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 1 § L+Ratio

You had the opportunity to close as L+Retarget, yet you chose to simply close as retarget. L move tbh[Humor][sarcasm][i can’t tell if i should tag this with humour or sarcasm so i’m using both] A smart kitten (talk) 15:55, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

truly a recovery from L to W like I’ve never seen before A smart kitten (talk) 15:59, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Nthaab Enterprises

What is your problem with Nthaab Enterprises page. Ruud Gwirambira (talk) 19:27, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

@Ruud Gwirambira: It is clearly promotional. You can contest the speedy deletion. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 19:28, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

A message from Jenncourtney

Hi Edward-Woodrow,

I'm a bit confused with your reason for declining the draft: Patrick O'Neil (author). You stated, "Needs more references for verification and WP:BLPSOURCE: all material likely to be challenged needs an inline citation." Yet with four of the five "citation needed" areas; a citation of proof of a degree, a citation for proof of teaching position, I checked other wikipedia listing of authors, and they were not required to include citations for the same references.

Examples:

Tod Goldberg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tod_Goldberg

Ivy Pochoda https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_Pochoda

Leonard Chang https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Chang

I'm wondering why this is needed for this listing.

The 5th citation request for this entry: "He stopped working with Dead Kennedys after their last show with the lineup of Jello Biafra, East Bay Ray, Klaus Flouride, and D.H. Peligro, at U.C. Davis in 1986.[citation needed]" What exactly are you requiring needs a citation?

jenncourtney


Jenncourtney (talk) 21:57, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

@Jenncourtney: Firstly, to clear up any confusion, I didn't add the [citation needed] tags, Dan arndt did, in this edit.
With that out of the way...
The simple fact is that, according to WP:BLPSOURCE, the Wikipedia policy on this matter, all material likely to be challenged needs an inline citation. Examples of this would be where he currently works, and his stay in prison. If other articles have material likely to be challenged that aren't backed up then inline citations, then they are in violation of policy. Not all articles are perfect, many are in violation of policies or guidelines. There's a lot of cleanup work to do that respect. I hope this makes things clearer. Cheers, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 22:42, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Helping out with RMs

If you would like you can already close RMs and then file RM/TRs with "Perform requested move, see talk page" whenever you cannot implement a "moved" outcome. (Twinkle helps with filing RM/TRs by selecting TW > XFD > RM > Uncontroversial. Or it's even easier with User:TheTVExpert/rmCloser.) I'm personally happy to help with fulfilling those, since I also did that. You don't have to wait until you have page-mover permission.

For the most part, the only RMs that aren't closed pretty quickly after elapsing are the ones that don't have a clear consensus, since in those instances the closer should be particularly experienced (or, some would say, an admin), and they are more difficult to determine. Similarly, the RM/TRs that wait around for a while are often ones that ought to be contested, require more checking, or don't have a good reason for the move.

You can also already go to WP:RM/TR and reply to requests that are potentially controversial (or have other issues). If you want to help with implementing RM/TRs requiring page-mover permissions, it's best first to be quite familiar with title policy and naming conventions in order to check whether the requests should be contested. When a controversial request is implemented with a WP:ROUNDROBIN, it's harder to revert (i.e., users who want to later revert it have to figure out how to request an RM/TR), so it helps to scrutinize them well. That can be more complicated than closing simple RMs, since with RMs people will have likely pointed out any relevant guidelines. SilverLocust 💬 00:33, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Desperate (song)

Thankyou for closing Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 5#Desperate (song) but as I mentioned due to Desperate (song) having substantial history and Desperate (Fireflight song) not having the edit history of "Desperate (song)" should probably be moved to "Desperate (Fireflight song)" and then "Desperate (song)" redirected to the DAB, thanks. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:41, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Which, if I understand this maze of moves correctly, would require a page mover, which I am not. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 20:44, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
I'll request it at RMT, I was just checking with you as you closed the RFD. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:48, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 20:49, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Wildsee (Pizol) moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Wildsee (Pizol). Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. BangJan1999 15:25, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Failure in the intelligence cycle

The article should not be moved as the topic 'intelligence failure' should have it's own, independent article Smahwk (talk) 09:36, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

It appears to me that "Failure in the intelligence cycle" is a specific subtopic of "Intelligence failure". Consensus seemed in favour of the move. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 11:39, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
The article is about faults which can take place at any step of the Intelligence cycle , while intelligence failure is a general term.Both of them should be different articles.Only 1 user was in favor of the move

Smahwk (talk) 12:02, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

It seems to me that we shouldn't have a serparate article where both of these topics can be adequately covered at intelligence failure. Two users, including the nominator supported the move. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 12:05, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
However, in the spirit of compromise, I am willing to re-open the move discussion to attract more editor input. Would that suit you? Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 12:07, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
That would be good Smahwk (talk) 12:11, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@Edward-Woodrow: Sorry, I didn't realize the "submit technical request" button hasn't been working on the script. I have submitted an edit request to fix that. The page was never actually moved, and no technical request was submitted. (However, this was a move-over-redirect that could be done without page mover, since the existing redirect Intelligence failure has has never been edited. See WP:MOR.) You can reopen the discussion simply by undoing the close edit. SilverLocust 💬 18:46, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@SilverLocust:  Done and thanks for the clarification. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 19:35, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive
  • On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

September 2023

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved, as you did to Best Cultural Institution Award, without good reason. They should have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Rejoy2003(talk) 19:59, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rejoy2003: I draftified it because the text was promotional, it was unsourced, and there was no indication of notability. Most of these problems appear to still extant. If you have something to say, don't say it with a template. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 20:01, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
You absolutely didn't do any judgement based on a few seconds of speculation over the article. I'm a former NPP reviewer myself, make sure to go through the proper guidelines.
Always give editors time to edit. I'm not editing on Wikipedia since yesterday, It's been over a year and I've contributed to near 100 articles. You could had atleast wait a couple mins before taking action. You seem to be new to this, hence this is a no surprise to me at all. Rejoy2003(talk) 20:04, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
I do apologize for being hasty; but the promotional text remains a problem. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 20:06, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Best Cultural Institution Award

Hello, Edward-Woodrow,

You draftified this article TWO minutes after it was created while the article creator was still working on it. Please do not be so quick to draftify or tag for deletion a recently created article or one that is being actively improved. Put yourself in the position of the content creator and allow them some time to craft a good article, add references, smooth out the prose. Not every editor chooses to use Draft space and some work directly in the main space of the project. The general rule is to allow editors at least an hour to improve articles before taking action on a recently created article. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 02:53, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Trouted

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

Per Nosebagbear's request at User:Panini!/Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Ban The Table. Panini! • 🥪 20:39, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

The disruptive moves guy

Hi. Regarding your message here, [3], please note that the IP is the same sock-puppeteer doing the disruptive moves (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Anup Rajbanshi). He repeatedly creates new accounts, moves articles and redirects to random locations to hijack their content. Then logs out and changes redirect back. Seems to be a bizarre way to get circumvent being banned from creating new articles. -- Soman (talk) 22:40, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Hm, thanks for the info. I'll strike out my message, since it isn't another user taking it upon themselves to clean up after someone else (as I initially thought) Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 22:43, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Cuttack Netaji Bus Terminal

Submitted draft for review. Thanks! SaUp2014 (talk) 05:30, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Looks much better, well done! Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 11:57, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

A message from Bictor H

Ú Bictor H (talk) 08:23, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Can I help you? Do you have a question about Wikipedia? Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 11:57, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Copy and paste move

I see you closed the Analytical Procedures Rfd, but it looks like instead of moving Draft:Analytical procedures to mainspace and then retargeting the capitalized redirect at issue there, you copied the content into the capitalized form? Graeme Bartlett then moved it to the lowercase form. Ultimately this was a cut and paste move that should be fixed, given that your edit summary didn't provide attribution as to where the content originated. Mdewman6 (talk) 16:08, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Hm... I'm quite sure I wouldn't have done a cut-and-paste move. I don't remember the exact situation (I probably used XfD closer), but I'll look into it and try to figure out what happened. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:21, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Okay, I did indeed screw up. I'll add a dummy edit for attribution. My apologies. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:22, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Nevermind, I think histmerge is the thing to do here. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:22, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, probably best to let an admin sort it out. No worries, thanks! Mdewman6 (talk) 16:29, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
And thank-you for alerting me to the problem! Cheers, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 19:19, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 September 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:35, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Taxobox task force

Hello, I was in the Taxobox task force page, about to join it, and then i saw you.

You have just (2 days ago??) joined it, and are the only other person to join in in 2023

Would you like me to help you revive it, or would you like to help me revive it?

>>> Webclouddat (talk) 05:37, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

another idea is to turn the task force into a WikiProject:Taxobox Webclouddat (talk) 05:54, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Well, what would reviving it entail? Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 11:58, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Thats a good question, hmm
maybe:
  • Making Adverts, putting them in accounts
  • Going to the talk pages of people who have "I love taxoboxes"-like userboxes and asking them if they want to join
  • Making separate pages for participants, To do list
  • Generally fixing the page for the Task force
  • I also think that turning it into a WikiProject will be better, it could then be part of WP TOL, or could be WP Biology
> I can get to making the list for participants and the to do list right now
>>> Webclouddat (talk) 15:02, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Actually, I will wait on what you think if it could be a WP before making any subpages Webclouddat (talk) 15:04, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
I'm not sure it needs "reviving" per se, as much as people occasionally updating the "to-do" list and doing some of the things on it. I mean, it's not like all the participants are retired (OK, #1 & #3, #4 are sporadically active, #2 hasn't edited since 2019, and so on, but Faendalimas, SMcCandlish, Leomk0403, and Snoteleks still do taxonomy-related work. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 15:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello there, yes I am pretty active in taxobox templates. It is true however that I have paid no attention to the to-do list. —Snoteleks (Talk) 15:29, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I would also like your input, do you think the Task force could be turned into a WikiProject?
I personally would
>>> Webclouddat (talk) 15:44, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping, yes I certainly keep an eye on these issues, as a practicing taxonomist I think I should. Its also of interest to my work with the Global Species List Working Group in that as a group we are not only monotoring what people want in taxonomy and nomenclature but attempting to guide them somewhat so as taxonomists we are "on the same page" so to speak when it comes to nomenclature. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 16:28, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
I'm definitely not a praticing taxonomist, but I have the TemplateEditor bit, so I might be able to help with something technical.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  20:49, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Live insect jewelry

Hi, I recently proposed a merge request of living brooch into live insect jewelry which has now been completed. Only now have I spotted you were about to initiate exactly the same thing back in August 2022. Why did you withdraw it? --37.157.52.71 (talk) 11:35, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

No idea. That was only a month after I had joined the project, so I suspect I was a) confused b) vaguely intimidated or c) all of the above. Oh well. Thanks for letting me know, good to see that they got merged after all. Cheers, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 11:40, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
👍 --37.157.52.71 (talk) 11:41, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cremastra/Archive_2&oldid=1255359481"