User talk:Alalch E./Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Alalch E.. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
extremely conversant
in my opinion, i am shocked at how familiar you are with many aspects of WP:RS.Sikonmina (talk) 22:26, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks! I've read up on several policies before registering. Although, by now, I think the way Wikipedia works is mainstream knowledge to an extent. twsabin 22:30, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
Holy See page
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!
- Hi Twsabin! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
-- 20:41, Tuesday, January 25, 2022 (UTC)
| Mission 1 | Mission 2 | Mission 3 | Mission 4 | Mission 5 | Mission 6 | Mission 7 |
| Say Hello to the World | An Invitation to Earth | Small Changes, Big Impact | The Neutral Point of View | The Veil of Verifiability | The Civility Code | Looking Good Together |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:39, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
January 2022
Resolved
Hello, I'm Falcon Kirtaran. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Clop (erotic fan art), but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. FalconK (talk) 00:53, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Falcon Kirtaran: Hi! I am replying here because you posted on my talk page. Is this an automated message? It was incredibly quick. I undid removal of a portion of the lead by an IP editor. Per MOS:LEAD, citations in the lead aren't necessary whenever it adequately summarizes the body. twsabin 00:56, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
- The form of the lead which I restored goes back to a Jan. 6 edit: diff. twsabin 01:00, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oh, I see what you were doing now. My bad. FalconK (talk) 01:02, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
- No problem! Nice tool, I'll have to look into that. twsabin 01:03, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oh, I see what you were doing now. My bad. FalconK (talk) 01:02, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
Head to Talk:Museum of Indigenous People
Discussing your revision removal. Luxnir (talk) 02:18, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
Speedy tagging
You tagged Draft:Bowling Blue Records as an WP:A7. Drafts cannot be deleted per A7. You created your account on January 17 and have already accumulated 424 edits that are more typical of an experienced user than a newbie. What other accounts have you had on Wikipedia? Regardless of your experience besides this account, you should not be speedy tagging articles if you don't understand how the criteria work.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:25, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Bbb23: Thanks for the heads up. I refer to the policy page each time I place the CSD tag (actually I've had it open in another window all day long), but I was incautious here. Sorry for the error. I haven't had any other accounts. I edited other wikis. I'm just enjoying monitoring recent changes honestly. I get interested in an article do a series of edits there, and move on... Is my editing so far okay? I'm interested in improving my WP:OLDSCHOOL game, and then moving on to some more advanced things I suppose. twsabin 19:37, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
- Here are my other CSD nominations in the past few days, which I've noted down, to see if the results match my expectations: [1][2][3][4][5][6] I hope that this makes me not an absolute net detriment in this area. I think I can understand every criterion, and I'll be more cautious. twsabin 19:59, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
- I don't want to make myself look too clever though. I notice things that I don't know how to react to: Just ignore?, report to an admin? twsabin 22:30, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
- About the latter: The indefinitely blocked user created a new account and wants... justice. This is the ANI which resulted in a block: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1086#User:Umhafs072 twsabin 22:42, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, I've blocked the sock.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:51, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
- About the latter: The indefinitely blocked user created a new account and wants... justice. This is the ANI which resulted in a block: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1086#User:Umhafs072 twsabin 22:42, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
User talk page messages
Hi Twsabin, thanks for your contributions. I noticed that when notifying users, you sometimes left messages for them on the user page instead of the user talk page. E.g. in this case here, or here. Please only leave these messages on the user talk page. Thanks! – NJD-DE (talk) 21:53, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
- Njd-de: Oh wow, thanks, I'll make sure not to repeat that. twsabin 21:54, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
- Awesome. Btw your ping didn't work. I'm too lazy to explain in my own words right now, so copied the following from Template:Ping fix:
Unfortunately, that method does not work. The notifications system only informs a user when you link their username in the same saved edit as you successfully sign your post. A ping cannot be fixed in a later edit by adding your signature or fixing a botched username. Instead, reference the user by adding
[[User:Example]]to an edit summary, or use one of the other methods at Help:Fixing failed pings.- Let me know if you have any questions, and happy editing! – NJD-DE (talk) 22:04, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Njd-de: Thanks for that too, very enlightening! twsabin 22:06, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
Battle of Grozny (1994–1995)
Waiting at Holly Williams Talk page
ResolvedPlease see question about the birth year of Holly Williams, journalist.
Chesapeake77 (talk) 21:26, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
A Barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| For dutifully and quickly resolving the mess at Talk:QAnon/GA1. It is already a contentious article and all the help we can get is greatly appreciated. Cheers, Etriusus 05:45, 7 February 2022 (UTC) |
My reason to edit
You can do as you will
...with regard to removing in-text notes, but other editors have routinely thanked me for them. Often, when editing, one is in the markup, a diversion to Talk is inconvenient, and the note can be removed after the issue is resolved. (Such notes therefore make tags the fewer.)
I wish at least you would consider pausing, and discussing, rather than doing such a deletion, in a venue where academic quality work has been going on for days. Cheers. 2601:246:C700:558:2116:D61F:ECC0:1821 (talk) 23:45, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker)No, Twsabin was correct to remove that. Your long comment was inappropriate. The article is not the place to leave working notes. No-one will see them unless they actually edit the section, whereas on the talk page they would be visible to anyone, and would serve as a history of why things were changed. And once you have been undone you should have followed WP:BRD rather than restoring it. Meters (talk) 23:55, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- And the point is just that—to aid editors taking the time to go into the section to work, giving them relevant information that will aid in improving the section. And while in-text notes (the markup technology for which, from what I understand, exists for such use) are easily targetable to the very point where attention is needed, attempting to likewise target in Talk is much more cumbersome (and is very often ignored).
- I never object to removal of a note by those coming in to edit, and addressing problems. I do object to drive-by reversions where no other constructive work is done. Otherwise no comment re WP:BRD, because there is literally no end to discussions that focus on guidelines with which other's are imperfectly complying. Cheers. 2601:246:C700:558:2116:D61F:ECC0:1821 (talk) 00:03, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
- You used hidden text to add something which looks very much like a start of a talk page discussion. WP:HIDDEN says that
Using [hidden text] as a talk page
is an inappropriate use thereof. I appreciate that your intentions are good, and the issue isn't with what you wrote, just where. Maybe next time make a shorter hidden text note such as "X information still missing", and also start a talk section (don't see it as a an unnecessary diversion please, talk pages are very important), to make other editors aware that something needs work, and to enable them to give feedback. How would someone now respond to your hidden text notice? ...it would have to be on the talk page regardless. twsabin 07:44, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
- You used hidden text to add something which looks very much like a start of a talk page discussion. WP:HIDDEN says that
- I never object to removal of a note by those coming in to edit, and addressing problems. I do object to drive-by reversions where no other constructive work is done. Otherwise no comment re WP:BRD, because there is literally no end to discussions that focus on guidelines with which other's are imperfectly complying. Cheers. 2601:246:C700:558:2116:D61F:ECC0:1821 (talk) 00:03, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Australian Auto Sport Alliance, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! A7V2 (talk) 00:38, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- @A7V2: Thanks for the notice. I'm not going to nominate. The added references are fine. I wasn't able to find such references myself. twsabin 00:45, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- No problem. Thanks for your edits there too. A7V2 (talk) 07:03, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
reverts
Notability
You recently helped me with a page I am trying to get published. I was wondering if you could help me understand how notability works. WHat requirements need to be met to have a topic be seen as notable? I understand no paid promotional material, but is there anything else. My topic has been rejected before and I want to do it right this time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Klange2000 (talk • contribs) 01:36, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Mcnally surname
Hello there, I am conscious of appearing as WP:OWN in the McNally (surname) article and while that was not my intention, I apologize. You and others want the article to include prose and that’s understandable, despite most surname articles on Wiki just being a list of notable bearers. I will rewrite the lead in a way that is etymologically accurate and non-controversial. Best regards, Gaelicbow (talk) 17:49, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Gaelicbow: Great! I understand where you have been coming from, but sometimes something is better than nothing. Articles don't have to be perfect and cover every important fact; what relevant information is included needs to be verifiable, and this seemed to pass those thresholds. Wikipedia:Wikipedia is a work in progress! Best regards, see you around—Alalch E. 17:57, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hi there (I know you asked not to reply on your talk page but) I am just letting you know that it’s ok, we can revert to the popular revision with prose. I did not think it was a big deal and thought that by removing the prose I might solve the issue with edit warring. I guess it doesn’t matter which etymology is prioritised. Apologies again, and sorry for the delayed reply. See you around :) Gaelicbow (talk) 19:03, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Jason Bolden
I loved how you cleaned up this article! Thank you for your help. Elttaruuu (talk) 19:33, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Elttaruuu: So happy to hear from you! Thank you! —Alalch E. 19:35, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
Your bizzare deleting/editing method in the Ambazonia page
Hi. While that your massive change in the Ambazonia page isn't out of the ordinary to me.
It's that your method of how deleting or editing choice in that page, as seen in it's history page. Got, me somewhat confused? Like, why not just reworked the page within 1-4 times to it's new current state, instead doing it individually within 20-22 times??? Chad The Goatman (talk) 03:42, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hi! :) I understand what you're saying but this is not that unusual, let alone bizzare. There is an essay about it, where the advantages of making small edits are explained: Wikipedia:Every edit must stand on its own feet#Make small edits. Cheers—Alalch E. 09:59, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
I appreciate you starting to work on the article, but the lead as it stands now will likely be reverted back to a status quo version pending the resolution of Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Editing_against_consensus_at_Sheikh_Hasina this ANI thread, so you may not want to duplicate your efforts. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:49, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the notification. —Alalch E. 22:50, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
- The lead on this article is apparently a thing, and has been the subject of edit warring and such for a couple months. I stepped into it by closing an RFC recently. The article could certainly use more uninvolved editors, so don't let me dissuade you, just wanted to give you a heads up about the lead. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:52, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'll keep it on my radar. There's certainly work to be done. —Alalch E. 22:54, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
- The lead on this article is apparently a thing, and has been the subject of edit warring and such for a couple months. I stepped into it by closing an RFC recently. The article could certainly use more uninvolved editors, so don't let me dissuade you, just wanted to give you a heads up about the lead. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:52, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Brett Stewart (musician) moved to draftspace
Thanks for your contributions to Brett Stewart (musician). Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it is promotional and reads like an advertisement and you may have a possible Conflict of Interest. 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. signed, Rosguill talk 20:35, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Rosguill: Thanks for pinging me as the last editor of that article, but my involvement with that article is very superficial, and a better editor to notify would have been the creator (CEvansMCO). I had already nominated a very similar, parallel, article (Brett Stewart's brother) at AfD. My contact with this COI/paid editor's set of articles comes from my recent changes patrolling. —Alalch E. 23:37, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, this was sent to you in error and meant to go to CEvansMCO. Thanks for pinging me. signed, Rosguill talk 01:18, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
ChatGPT etc.
I wonder what wording in the requests to ChatGPT causes so much "In conclusion..." -- Whpq (talk) 13:26, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- It isn't specific to a prompt I think, apart from maybe being told to "write an article". It adds some type of "in conclusion" wording to almost anything. There are multiple variants of such verbiage ("Finally," etc.) —Alalch E. 13:31, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm just thinking that it may be a request made by a non-English speaker using machine translation to form the request and it gets translated into asking for an essay. The "in conclusion" part is very much like the ending of an essay. The spamminess is likely working from a corpus for that subject that consists overwhelmingly of press releases and advertising. Spam in, spam out. -- Whpq (talk) 13:40, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Sounds very plausible. About the spamminess and why some outputs are really outwardly promotional, but some are cunningly neutral, while also being promotional in intent—you're right I think, it's almost all about the corpus, and to a lesser degree may also have to do with prompts. —Alalch E. 13:44, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm just thinking that it may be a request made by a non-English speaker using machine translation to form the request and it gets translated into asking for an essay. The "in conclusion" part is very much like the ending of an essay. The spamminess is likely working from a corpus for that subject that consists overwhelmingly of press releases and advertising. Spam in, spam out. -- Whpq (talk) 13:40, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Might be useful tool for detecting AI Generated materials
Hi, you've encountered me in Lobo River. Thanks to your AI generated tag I was able to scrutinize an editor's abuse of AI generated text. Anyways, I saw another editor at WP:ANI talking about https://gptzero.me/. It might be a useful website to detect AI generated text in the future. Hope I helped you as well. Lenticel (talk) 12:01, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks! I also became aware of GPTZero from discussions on Wikipedia, prior to the latest incidents at ANI. —Alalch E. 16:14, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Hoaxes?
Hi! You've nominated a lot of user space pages for speedy deletion as hoaxes. Has there been any discussion anywhere of the contribs of these users? Or could you perhaps explain briefly why you're sure they're all hoaxes? I notice that Draft:Love power of mankind is tagged as chatbot content, but that doesn't seem to apply to some of the others. Not questioning your judgement, but would like to be sure before I zap 100+ pages – they'd be a pain to undelete if that became necessary! Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:13, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
- Natural that you would be surprised to see so many pages tagged. Please see my yesterday's User:Alalch E./CSD log. A user with four accounts used Wikipedia to create an elaborate "ecosystem" of pages about fictional topics (such as a fictional band). A fourth of the pages were deleted yesterday and I nominated the rest today.—Alalch E. 13:01, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Justlettersandnumbers: Some comments were made here: User talk:SpikesIvory#April 2023. All of the pages have now been deleted.The ridiculous chatbot essays are unrelated. They are borderline cases. I know that some administrators would gladly delete such pages, but probably not every administrator would. —Alalch E. 13:24, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
World War I
Thank you for your improvements to the World War I portal. I'm busy this evening but will join in when I can. I apologise if I've failed to assume good faith on this occasion; I sometimes have difficulty doing so with portals after previous bad experiences. Thanks again, Certes (talk) 17:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- You're welcome! I will move the comment for Buster D, that I've just left, to this section; it encapsulates my thinking on the topic:
- @BusterD: I think it's possible to conceive of the WWI portal not being deleted. It has the same problems as the WWII portal. Is the WWII portal going to get deleted? Highly unlikely. Then the WWI portal should not be deleted either. Down the line, the War Portal could be recreated using good portal practices. I've made some changes to the WWI portal with this in mind. (16:57, 13 April 2023) —Alalch E. 17:38, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Given your excellent work in this area, could you have a look at Portal:Law, and see if there is anything you think needs to be done there? Cheers! BD2412 T 15:43, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, I'll take a look! —Alalch E. 15:46, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Re Mac
I'd also rather avoid three hatnotes in a row, but I'd do it by putting businesses, schools, and sports orgs back within Organizations, where they were before Clarity found the page. The hatnotes were a compromise. These three topics are, simply, organizations, and if they aren't listed there, then there must be hatnotes for the reader's sanity. —swpbT • beyond • mutual 00:15, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
- I get what you are saying and tend to agree on a first look. I'm better able to see now that there's a deeper dispute underneath between you and another editor. But... is there really something wrong with a custom hatnote as opposed to three hatnote rows (could be, real question)?—Alalch E. 00:20, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
- Sure, a single hatnote for all three sections would be a fine solution, if they must be split out at all. Yeah, thanks for your careful assessment of the situation. —swpbT • beyond • mutual 00:24, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
- There's Template:Hatnote group as an alternative (to the custom hatnote) to make them render inline. WP:HNR seems to recommend against multiple rows of hatnotes of the same type. You're welcome. —Alalch E. 00:25, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
- Sure, a single hatnote for all three sections would be a fine solution, if they must be split out at all. Yeah, thanks for your careful assessment of the situation. —swpbT • beyond • mutual 00:24, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
Zainab Salbi
Hiya I just wanted to say thanks for working on the lead at Zainab Salbi. I'm happy it's improved and the length is better again. I do still think that if you need to take 150 words to explain the word salad of someone else's edit summary means, and that edit did very disparate things, then it is difficult to really understand what the edit was about. Particularly if it's on the lead of a article promoted to GA the day before. But that's water under the bridge for me, I just wanted explain where I was coming from. I also agree with Wikipedia:Every edit must stand on its own feet which I see you posted above. Cheers and happy editing. Mujinga (talk) 12:08, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks! I completely understand where you were coming from, and I'm glad that I could help.—Alalch E. 12:10, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
May 2023
I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Please review WP:RS and WP:V before continuing to attempt to edit-war WP:GUNREL sources into the encyclopedia. Imamul Ifaz (talk) 13:55, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
- You copied this warning that David Gerrard left on your talk page onto my talk page baselessly. I have informed editors of what you have been up to, in the ANI thread that I started (archived).—Alalch E. 18:05, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Rationale for deletion
Hi! I just noticed your recent vote in a deletion discussion. I haven't voted, but I probably agree with you on deleting this article! However, you didn't really state why you personally think the article should be deleted. Closers are directed to ignore "per nominator" arguments. In order for your opinion to have weight in the outcome, would you consider giving a bit more information on your reasoning? Thanks! — Jacona (talk) 13:16, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
- That isn't necessary. WP:ATA is a nice essay with much good content but I disagree that closers "are directed to", that they should, or are allowed to, discount such comments, as long as it's clear which argument is being referenced, and as long as the argument points to a relevant WP:DELREASON. "Per nom" here clearly means "I agree with everything that the nominator said". I don't have any more information to give. I have watched this page since creation and it should be deleted exactly for the reasons stated by the nominator. Thanks for the feedback.—Alalch E. 13:28, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
FYI
At Talk:Bangladesh#Images, Imamul Ifaz accused you of being a sockpuppet of Solomon. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:00, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks...—Alalch E. 21:43, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
Numbeo
Are you being paid by Mladen Adamović to make edits on Numbeo on his behalf? You've been making significant and enthusiastic edits on the article over the past few weeks, many of which trying to "explain" how the website works. John Yunshire (talk) 09:21, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
- @John Yunshire: No. You're asking me this in tandem with your reverts in the Numbeo article. One of these two reverts' summaries is
...as claimed by Numbeo, and using a citation that leads back to the Numbeo website with said claim. Seriously?
, but you should see WP:SELFSOURCE. Yes, seriously. In my opinion, the material is not self-serving, not an exceptional claim, does not involve claims about third parties, claims about events not directly related to the subject, and there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity. And no, the article is not based primarily on such sources. This information is also conveyed in secondary sources, but, yes it does trace back to the Numbeo website. By only saying that it is a crowdsourced database we are not describing it accurately, because the data also comes from manual gathering. I stand by my edits.—Alalch E. 09:54, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
Scottywong case opened
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Scottywong. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Scottywong/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 21, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Scottywong/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 19:21, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
the userbox
Thanks for tagging me on the userbox. I actually created that one and @CorbieVreccan moved it to the project page :) Indigenous girl (talk) 21:20, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
- You're welcome :) —Alalch E. 21:23, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, thank you for your work on this. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 21:31, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Invitation
Hello Alalch E.!
- The New Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
- We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
- Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
- Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
- If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.
Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!
Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:45, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Civility Barnstar |
| I'd rather call this the "surpasses my wildest expectations barnstar." Two years ago I was frustrated with your work on Wikipedia, but you seem to have changed crystals in your lightsaber and act like you want to be on our team now. I often read commonsense in your talk page edits and process assertions. Best of all, you're not manic anymore, or at least your behavior doesn't seem to demonstrate a maniacal aspect today. Sorry for the rub. Proud of you. You've come a long way. Still don't know if I trust you, but I AM starting to like you. Does that count? All the best. BusterD (talk) 19:05, 13 July 2023 (UTC) |
- Thank you. At some point, not long ago, when I looked back at my experience on the project since I joined, it popped into my head how great I had been treated by everyone, despite my shortcomings. People who responded to my ill-advised actions, and as you pithily sum it up, manic manner, were level-headed and intellectually fair. And well-meaning. It made me look back at my life and figure some things out. I became able to see more of that, when I couldn't see it before. Same to you, hope you're having a great summer.—Alalch E. 19:38, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Hai Help me
How to revert an to previous edits than undo ....help me...
Multiple minute edits reverting to previous better form ??how is it possible...can you can explain the details and steps involved in it.
Jyomon (talk) 05:10, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
- Hi, still need help with this? There are multiple ways to do this, depending on whether all the edits which you want to revert were made by one or multiple editors. If they were made by multiple editors, the correct way to do it is to open the page history, click on the timestamp link prior to the bad edits, which will load that revision of the page, then click to edit that revision, and save it over the present revision: this will, in effect, undo all of the edits subsequent to that (historical) revision. If all of the edits were made by a single editor, and they were obvious vandalism (it's important to know what is and what isn't vandalism), you can use the rollback tool, but only if you have the permission to use it, which is granted if administrators trust that you will not use it incorrectly. Similar to rollback is WP:Twinkle's or WP:Ultraviolet's so-called pseudo-rollback; to understand what pseudo-rollback is, and how it is different from true rollback you should read the documentation of these gadgets. —Alalch E. 19:49, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Alalch E.,
Please do not tag categories for speedy deletion unless they have been emptied, by human editor or by our CFD bot. Otherwise, it leaves red links on articles, templates and other categories which are not permitted according to WP:REDNO. Categories that are designated to be deleted via CFD deletion discussion are emptied by a bot so please do not tag them for CSD prematurely. Also, FYI, full categories are not eligible for CSD G5 unlike most other pages on the project. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 17:05, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
- It is a template created in the wrong namespace, a clear error by the creator. The reason for tagging is not about the category as a category, it was wrong-namespace creation. Edit: Yeah, I understand now that the category had one member (the template that the editor actually wanted to create) and I could have safely emptied it myself before tagging (someone did that; the page was then deleted under G6). I just saw a {{db-error}} case and didn't stop didn't stop to think about the implication of the page being a category. —Alalch E. 20:25, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Witchcraft
Please be aware that there are ongoing discussions on the Witchcraft talk page about systemic bias, especially in the lede. This is a big and thorny issue right now. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 21:38, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll see if I have something of value to add to the discussion. I have detected a eurocentric bias, however, in how the lead is structured (and I believe I've significantly fixed it, just a sentence ordering tweak), which is different from the type of bias that is primarily discussed, as far as I can see.—Alalch E. 21:41, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
Darker Dreams (talk) 23:01, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Tsamai Tribe
Hello. Why is my source (3 months of a senior thesis, embedded with a tribe, by an Anthropologist with an MA) considered to be an invalid source? If educational publications are not considered valid sources, then what is a valid source? MorGalVanderhoef (talk) 20:13, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
- Hello. There are three separate issues involved with the content sourced to your website. The first is that there is no evidence on your website that the content therein is a work of WP:SCHOLARSHIP, and personal web pages are not reliable sources; but, furthermore, even if it was indeed a scholarly work as a master's thesis, you will see in the cited guideline that "Master's dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influence". The second issue is that content was significantly copied, which is contrary to the copyright policy, as the source does not have a license compatible with Wikipedia. Utimately (third issue), Wikipedia as an encyclopedia is always about consolidating information from multiple sources, and including so much content from one source, even if modified in a variety of ways, is not compatible with this general idea. Sincerely—Alalch E. 20:28, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
New page reviewer granted
Hi Alalch E.. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at the permissions page in case your user right is time-limited or probationary. 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 encyclopedia. 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 or ask via the NPP Discord. 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. Steps such as checking for copyright violations using Earwig's copyright violation detector, checking for duplicate articles, and evaluating sources (both in the article, and if needed, via a Google search) for compliance with the general notability guideline are mandatory and will take a few minutes per article.
- Please review some of our flowcharts (1, 2) to help ensure you don't forget any required steps.
- 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. If you can read any languages other than English, please add yourself to the list of new page reviewers with language proficiencies. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 22:47, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Copyeditor's Barnstar |
| This is for your significant help in Pramod Kumar Kushwaha article. Admantine123 (talk) 18:24, 25 August 2023 (UTC) |
- You are welcome! Thanks for this interesting article. —Alalch E. 18:25, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Article Rescue Barnstar | |
| Kerrrzappp! Thank you so much for writing Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center. I don't think this is the context this barnstar was really intended to be used in, but I think it fits well enough. casualdejekyll 01:14, 26 August 2023 (UTC) |
- Thank you, and it was mostly your thoughtful comment in the MfD that made me go in this direction, so thanks for that too!—Alalch E. 18:15, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
DYK for Rudi Čajavec (company)
On 3 September 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rudi Čajavec (company), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in Yugoslavia, Rudi Čajavec, the electronics company that produced various components of the M-84 tank, also made guitar amplifiers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rudi Čajavec (company). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Rudi Čajavec (company)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:03, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
Help with editing
Him I could use some help adding to the List of The Transformers (TV series) characters article, would you be able to help me out? Davidgoodheart (talk) 02:10, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- I'd really like to help, but I'm not sure if I'm able to. I'll definitely take a look. —Alalch E. 16:36, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive
| New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive |  |
| |
| 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)
New pages patrol newsletter
Hello Alalch E.,
Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!
October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.
PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.
Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.
Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.
Reminders:
- You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
- Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
- To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
New page reviewer granted
Hi Alalch E.. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at the permissions page in case your user right is time-limited or probationary. 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 encyclopedia. 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 or ask via the NPP Discord. 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, including checking for copyright violations using Earwig's copyright violation detector, checking for duplicate articles, and evaluating sources (both in the article, and if needed, via a Google search) for compliance with the general notability guideline.
- Please review some of our flowcharts (1, 2) to help ensure you don't forget any steps.
- 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. If you can read any languages other than English, please add yourself to the list of new page reviewers with language proficiencies. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 20:02, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you. —Alalch E. 20:03, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Portal:Video games
|
The Portal Barnstar | |
| The Portal Barnstar is awarded to Wikipedians who have made significant contributions to topic portals. I am not yet convinced this portal should survive without support of it's primary WikiProject, but it is in a vastly improved state due to your efforts. -- ferret (talk) 20:00, 1 October 2023 (UTC) |
- Wow, thank you! :)—Alalch E. 20:02, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for your work in restructuring Nakba denial into more discrete and navigable sections. I just rumbled along through the sources, but then got a bit stuck on the best way to slice and dice it. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:45, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
- You're welcome, thanks for the article, and for your composure in the AfD. —Alalch E. 13:55, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Good catch
Well seen, well held, well executed. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 21:59, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks! —Alalch E. 22:01, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
Martin Burckhardt
Hi...I spent a good week working on the revisions to Dr. Burckhardt's Wiki page and see you reversed them? What was the problem...apologies in advance for any stupidity on my part? Heideana (talk) 17:59, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
Bit pre-emptive
November Articles for creation backlog drive
Hello Alalch E.:
WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.
You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.
Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
Introduction to contentious topics
You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Additionally you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
— Red-tailed hawk (nest) 07:09, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
Outlines
I'm glad you are taking an interest in outlines.
If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to contact me.
I'm back recently from a 4-year period of less involvement, and I'm in the process of getting back up to speed. The main thing I'm interested in is the state of the outlines, such as which ones have fallen most out-of-date or are in most need of maintenance.
To deal with that, I'm browsing/skimming them all looking for problems, such as tags and blatant formatting issues (like navigation footers embedded in the middle of an outline), missing standard components and sections, empty sections, prose format (outlines are non-prose bullet lists, and while they may have annotations and the occasional section lead paragraph, outlines shouldn't have sections comprised of free-standing paragraphs like articles), etc. Beyond that, they all need a good proofread.
There are over 800 outlines, and so this is taking some time. If you'd like to help, please feel free to do so. I welcome all the help I can get!
Back to your interest in outlines, you are hereby cordially invited to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines.
You can sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines#Participants. See also: Category:WikiProject Outlines participants.
I've been revamping the Wikiproject page, and so there is a lot of up-to-date news and such on there. As I delve deeper into outline refurbishing and development, there will be more popping up on there, so check it often!
Something major and good that has happened. Outline of lichens was just elevated, to be our very first Featured List! To follow that success, now is the time to assess which outlines would be the easiest to elevate. So, while you're navigating around outlines, please keep on the lookout for the next worthy candidate for Featured Lists.
I'm happy that you've chosen an outline to work on. I can hardly wait to see what you transform it into.
Nice to meet you. Have fun. Sincerely, — The Transhumanist 22:52, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the invitation, and this useful message, I will be sure to join, and will be on the lookout for the candidates. —Alalch E. 23:01, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Outline inspection tip
When working on outlines, it is important to check links to see if they are redirects or lead to disambiguation pages. Redirects pose a problem when they are double, so to avoid that, it is best to turn them blue when you come across them. Disambiguation pages are bad, and should be replaced with the direct link to the intended article.
The easiest way to spot these is with viewing features that turn the links a different color so that you can see what they are just by looking at them, rather than having to click on them to check.
For how to set this up, see: Wikipedia:Tools/Optimum tool set#Enhanced vision.
I hope you find this tip useful. Sincerely, — The Transhumanist 22:52, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- Wonderful, very useful, thank you. —Alalch E. 22:56, 8 November 2023 (UTC)