User talk:Deepfriedokra

If anyone claims to be my "doppelganger" or "clone," please block on sight
If you need page protection, please report at WP:RfPP
Any admin should feel free to undo an admin action of mine without prior discussion. A ping would be nice. I unblock high-risk appellants. Sometimes it does not work out. It would not be wheel-warring to reblock the recidivistic among them.

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Start a new discussion thread

User talk:Deepfriedokra/archives

Hi

I wrote my first article about a unique topic and it got deleted by you I think.

I wrote it aboit this company here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2024/07/06/tiktokers-push-facial-gum-for-chiseled-jaws-but-wheres-the-evidence/

this is Stronger Gum's website: https://www.strongergum.com/

here is additional citation for the founder's story: https://www.unrealinternet.com/rockstars/founder-portraits/the-founders-series-decembers-uk-founders-building-businesses-that-matter-not-just-profit%20 Veetwikicreations (talk) 12:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Veetwikicreations: Thanks for your note. Please read the deletion notice I left on your talk page. The links you have posted here do not meet the requirement for significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. Once again, please read the notice I left on your talk page. Thank you. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:04, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Troll

I've just declined UTRS appeal #98962, and wonder whether you think removing UTRS access would be a good idea. 🤔 JBW (talk) 20:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW: Oh. Them again. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:07, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:11, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

👍 JBW (talk) 21:13, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

EC of User:JackintheBox

Hiya, on 30 Dec -23 you renewed this user's IPBE for another year, and at the same time set their EC status also to expire in a year. Given that the EC was previously permanent, I assume that was a clerical error, or was there an actual reason for it? They've queried this, and in response I've set the EC as permanent. Let me know if I shouldn't have, and I'll revert. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:31, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing: Looks like a misclick. Thanks/ -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:29, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 January 2025

From the editors: Looking back, looking forward

Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2024

In the media: Will you be targeted?

Technology report: New Calculator template brings interactivity at last

Essay: Meet the Canadian who holds the longest editing streak on Wikipedia

Opinion: Reflections one score hence

News and notes: It's a new dawn, it's a new day, it's a new life for me... and I'm feeling free

Serendipity: What we've left behind, and where we want to go next

Op-ed: Elon Musk and the right on Wikipedia

In focus: Twenty years of The Signpost: What did it take?

Arbitration report: Analyzing commonalities of some contentious topics

Humour: How to make friends on Wikipedia

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:53, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 7 February 2025

Recent research: GPT-4 writes better edit summaries than human Wikipedians

News and notes: Let's talk!

Opinion: Fathoms Below, but over the moon

In the media: Wikipedia is an extension of legacy media propaganda, says Elon Musk

Community view: 24th Wikipedia Day in New York City

Arbitration report: Palestine-Israel articles 5 has closed

Traffic report: A wild drive

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * Sent manually via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:44, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 February 2025

News and notes: Administrator elections up for reapproval and 1bil GET snagged on Commons

Serendipity: Guinea-Bissau Heritage from Commons to the World

Technology report: Hear that? The wikis go silent twice a year

In the media: The end of the world

Recent research: What's known about how readers navigate Wikipedia; Italian Wikipedia hardest to read

Opinion: Sennecaster's RfA debriefing

Tips and tricks: One year after this article is posted, will every single article on Wikipedia have a short description?

Community view: Open letter from French Wikipedians says "no" to intimidation of volunteer contributors

Traffic report: Temporary scars, February stars

Essay: The source, the whole source, and nothing but the source

Obituary: Ümüt Çınar (Kmoksy) and Vinícius Medina Kern (Vmkern)

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:27, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I dont understand.

I deleted the business link(s) and submitted for review. I read your message. I am NOT intentionally breaking wiki rules. I am trying to learn. Lbarnett777 (talk) 00:12, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lbarnett777: Please read the messages I left on you talk page. Including the information linked in the messages. It is improved, but still needs work. When it is ready, click the submit button. Best. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:40, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not only UPE

But some of the poorest and shoddy work that I have seen for a long time. Thank you for blocking them. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:49, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Timtrent: You're welcome. I love to rock-and-roll. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:50, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These people spend so much time and energy learning how to write ad copy they don't realize how easy it is to see. I've been seeing and reading ads for mumblety-mumble years. It's like they stand up and wave at me. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:53, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Schlacke ist. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:57, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I used to write advertorial and press releases. They're so easy to spot.

That German tag must be good idiomatic slang. Google gets me "Slag is" but that doesn't really work 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:37, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Schlock. Tripe. Trash. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:05, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage is now redirect

Hey, Fritter. When you moved User:Lbarnett777 to Draft:Heather Brazell Hill, it looks like you left the userpage as a redirect. Was that intentional? Bishonen | tålk 10:18, 14 March 2025 (UTC).[reply]

@Bishonen: Yes. Probably no lpnger needed. Just wanted them to be able to find it after I moved it. Thanks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:22, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will you take a look at my draft and see if it is acceptable so far? Lbarnett777 (talk) 19:22, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lbarnett777: Thanks for asking. What jumpss out at first is the use of her first name. Needs to be last name. First name is too familiar. Not sure she meets the relevant notability requirement, WP:NPOL, so will need to meet WP:ANYBIO and/or WP:GNG. Subjects of articles must meet inclusion requirements with reliable sources which are unconnected with the subject and which provide verifiable information. Someone unconnected with the subject needs to have written a great deal about the subject. You can also request help at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk.Hope this helps. Best. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:57, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A UTRS appeal

~~I have declined~~ UTRS appeal #101356, but I've also left a comment there which you may like to consider. JBW (talk) 22:37, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I had declined it, but it turns out that I didn't. However, you still may like to consider my suggestion. JBW (talk) 22:45, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW: Ah, more schlock. how delightful. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:46, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Meh. I like to try to give them three tries before banning. Perhaps they will make a surprisingly to the point response to me. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:52, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I wasn't sure myself about it, and I'm happy to accept your decision. If you mean 3 tries at UTRS, then obviously we aren't there yet, but if we count both UTRS and talk page, then we are up to 4 appeals which just say "I'm so incompetent that I can't even use ChatBot to write an appeal, let alone write one myself", and nothing else. 🥴 JBW (talk) 00:15, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 March 2025

From the editor: Hanami

Opinion: Talking about governments editing Wikipedia

News and notes: Deeper look at takedowns targeting Wikipedia

In the media: The good, the bad, and the unusual

Recent research: Explaining the disappointing history of Flagged Revisions; and what's the impact of ChatGPT on Wikipedia so far?

Traffic report: All the world's a stage, we are merely players...

Gallery: WikiPortraits rule!

Essay: Unusual biographical images

Obituary: Rest in peace

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:04, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:04, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Need Some Help

Thanks, y'all, but I try to avoid ANI'esque dramaz. Please work it out, seek WP:DISPUTERESOLUTION, and so forth. Thanks.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:23, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Mikeblas has removed multiple sources from many pages, in my case WINC (AM). I asked for his reasoning behind the changes and he this was his reply. I have read the discussions linked in his response, but find nothing that says the linked sources should be removed. The discussions really die off before they reach any form of a conclusion.

Mikeblas seems to be using Wikipedia's COPYVIO rules against another website. I've never heard of our rules being used to determine if another site is in violation of COPYVIO. Regardless, the site in question, worldradiohistory.com, links scans in PDF format, of radio and television magazines, almanacs, and yearbooks dating back to the 30s. The website has been linked on the WINC (AM) page since 2014 with no issue.

Per my restrictions, I am not allowed to rock the boat, so I am handing your oars on this one. Help? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:43, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Deb: I think it is that knows more about copyright than I ever will. Perhaps she can help us with this. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:27, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I'm no expert on that topic at all. However, it sounds like Mikeblas's reasoning is correct. The fact that a site has been used as a source in the past without any obvious problems is not really relevant. How about discussing this at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard? That's what Mikeblas should really have done first. Deb (talk) 08:37, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. @Neutralhomer: RSN then. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:40, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's important to point out that Neutralhomer has significantly misrepresented my actions. They say that I removed multiple sources from many pages, but that's simply not true. What I actually did was remove the URLs (and related parameters) from several references.

For example, the WINC article had this reference:

::::<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext">
::::{{cite book
::::	|url=https://www.worldradiohistory.com/Archive-BC/BC-1941/1941-02-10-BC.pdf
::::	|title=Broadcasting
::::	|date=February 10, 1941
::::	|access-date=December 1, 2013
::::	|publisher=Broadcasting Publications
::::	|page=29
::::	|archive-date=June 21, 2020
::::	|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200621222839/https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-BC/BC-1941/1941-02-10-BC.pdf
::::	|url-status=live}}
::::}}
::::</syntaxhighlight>
::::

and I removed the url= parameter because it links to apparent copyvio. With that parameter gone, the url-status, archive-date, archive-url, url-status, and access-date parameters are all superflous. The reference was edited, but certainly not removed. Here's the reference left behind, with the URL and related parameters trimmed:

::::<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext">
::::{{cite magazine 
::::	|title=Broadcasting 
::::	|date=February 10, 1941 
::::	|publisher=Broadcasting Publications 
::::	|page=29
::::}}
::::</syntaxhighlight>
::::

Many (!) references in this article were incomplete, containing a title for a book which was really a periodical, but not including a section or chapter name for the title and using the periodical name for the title instead. I've been fixing these errors and can probably finish that today. Some of the references also fail verification. And really, that's the problem here: in order to verify the citation, an editor is obliged to download copyvio content themselves through the supplied link. That's very uncomfortable, and I think it's one of the secondary reasons the WP:COPYVIO policy says that links to copyvio aren't acceptable.

Next, Deb says That's what Mikeblas should really have done first. But I guess they didn't read the provided context: fact is that posting at Wikipedia:Reliable Sources/Noticeboard was what I did first, almost two years ago. I linked to the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 407#help with link spam to copyvio references at worldradiohistory.com conversation in my response to Neutralhomer, which they linked here.

I also linked to the current conversations at other locations in my response, again previously linked here by Neutralhomer:

Note that each of these conversations (and also the original WP:RSN conversation, too!) suggested that I bring up the issue at some other different forum. It is frustrating that so many people believe the conversation should be where they think it should be, and not where it is. Now, the conversation is spread out among six different locations, counting this user talk page. -- mikeblas (talk) 14:40, 8 April 2025 (UTC)|}[reply]

Sorry for your loss

Just seeing this. Not sure if it was recent, but it's never easier regardless. My condolences to you and your family. Star Mississippi 20:19, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Star Mississippi: Thanks you. It has been ten years. I was out for about 7 months prior and about 2 years and a half after. It was talk page messages that pulled me back.-- Deepfriedokra (talk)

JuhiVadla

Hello Deepfriedokra,

I appreciate you posting on my talk page. I found out that the page Mike Amiri has been vandalized, so I tried to put the promotional content on the vandalizer's user page as compensation. I am not very familiar with Wikipedia or its policies and did not realize that promotional content cannot be added to one's user page either. Thank you for helping me on Wikipedia. If you have advice for me, I would appreciate it. HwyNerd Mike (contribs | talk) 20:27, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@HwyNerd Mike: Thanks. No problem. I was a bit confuesd at first. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:07, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tips

Any tips on how to make pages faster? DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 15:29, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DarkHorseMayhem: Not really. I've always written very slowly. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:35, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How long does usually take you to make good written sourced well article? DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 15:36, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

once I have found sources, a few days. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:53, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Another UTRS appeal

I've commented at UTRS appeal #102752. JBW (talk) 18:35, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW:I will cheerfully restore top page access. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

👍 Obviously whether it will do any good remains to be seen, but I don't see any reason not to give them a chance. JBW (talk) 20:26, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, in case you wondered, "je" was a typo for "me". The fact that it's a word of similar meaning in another tongue was pure chance. JBW (talk) 20:30, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW: She has come a long way. Oh, I typo all the time -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:32, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]