User talk:C.Fred/Archive 32
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Happy New Year, C.Fred!
C.Fred,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 14:55, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Speedy deletion nomination of Mike Johnson ( American Politician)
A tag has been placed on Mike Johnson ( American Politician) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 17:12, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Erik Paaske
Hi there - I admit I am new to this so thank you for any help you can provde. Why is it now allowed to link directly to primary sources, in this case a church book entry? Trouble at the mill (talk) 18:50, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Trouble at the mill First, it's a primary source, which is to be avoided except in very limited circumstances. Second, all it does is indicate a person by that name was born that date in that location; there is nothing to link that record to the subject of the article. —C.Fred (talk) 18:56, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- Understood, thanks. That being said, as we are dealing with unique names for both subject and parents I would argue that this is indisputable the original church book entry from the Kolding church that recorded the birth of E. Paaske. Trouble at the mill (talk) 19:04, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – January 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Oversighter changes
Arbitration
- Following the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Aoidh, Cabayi, Firefly, HJ Mitchell, Maxim, Sdrqaz, ToBeFree, Z1720.
- Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee rescinded the restrictions on the page name move discussions for the two Ireland pages that were enacted in June 2009.
- The arbitration case Industrial agriculture has been closed.
Miscellaneous
- The New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in January 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,000 unreviewed articles awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!
The ip's talk page needs to be revoked. Untamed1910 (talk) 04:50, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Untamed1910 If they keep up, they'll lose TPA before too long. —C.Fred (talk) 04:52, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
There was no reason for removing that portrait I changed.
As I perfectly described it is a clearer and more high quality image so the face of the person talked about in the article is more easily discerned. What is the reason for instantly reverting my edit? 2A02:587:5468:2800:29E8:BD2A:59CE:FB12 (talk) 02:06, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
- As I noted in the edit summary, there is no clear evidence that the image is under a free license. That's why the image is also up for deletion. —C.Fred (talk) 02:07, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
- It's the official portrait of a prime minister used for half a decade in the entire country. How can it not be under free license? 2A02:587:5468:2800:29E8:BD2A:59CE:FB12 (talk) 02:08, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar |
| For the polite and quick handling of a new editor's initially unclear edit request at Talk:Timeline of Philippine history. CMD (talk) 02:31, 11 January 2024 (UTC) |
MOS:ETHNICITY Explicitly says that Native American is not an ethnicity and is allowed to go in the lead. Please stop removing it from the lead of Alaqua Cox. She was born and raised on a reservation and is a member of the Menominee nation. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 04:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Edit Josh Cahill
None of the provided sources mentions any of the included name. How come the edit isn't accepted? It's not fair to brand it as edit warring.
https://archive.is/WKioM - only mentions Josh Cahill. 2402:D000:8100:A97A:FD03:A31D:4128:1CC8 (talk) 03:49, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – February 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).
Administrator changes
Bureaucrat changes
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.
Technical news
- Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)
Arbitration
- Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
- Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.
Miscellaneous
- Voting in the 2024 Steward elections will begin on 06 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 27 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
- A vote to ratify the charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open till 2 February 2024, 23:59:59 (UTC) via Secure Poll. All eligible voters within the Wikimedia community have the opportunity to either support or oppose the adoption of the U4C Charter and share their reasons. The details of the voting process and voter eligibility can be found here.
- Community Tech has made some preliminary decisions about the future of the Community Wishlist Survey. In summary, they aim to develop a new, continuous intake system for community technical requests that improves prioritization, resource allocation, and communication regarding wishes. Read more
- The Unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in February 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!
Username and legal threat issues
Hi C.Fred. Would you be willing to take a look at User:AAPS Attorney? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Also see User talk:Jjjerry14, probably the same person. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 04:54, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Question about a deleted page
What were you seeing at Draft:Md Mehedi Hasan Prince that I wasn't? To me it looked like someone was trying to draft an article which is what draftspace is for. I didn't really see how it fitted within the realm of G11. The only two red flags that stood out to me were a previously deleted version of the page and how it looked like they were working off of some guide on how to create an article (which could have some good faith reason behind it). So I was just wondering if you could elaborate on your reasoning so I could understand when approaching similar situations myself? Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 13:07, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Clovermoss Looking at their username and the title of the draft, it was clear they were trying to write an autobiography. There was no claim of significance, just their website address, so it was pretty clear they were mainly interested in using Wikipedia to promote themselves. —C.Fred (talk) 13:09, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, I missed the username. That explains it. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 13:09, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
BLP noticeboard concern re: Trivium ex-band member
Hello, could you remove my username from the top of that topic?
Kinda feels weird because it makes it sound like I am an alt of galamity, and that's kinda making me feel uncomfortable.
I feel I made the edits that I did in good faith, supported by what I felt were valid citations. I've undone the edits I made on the various pages (including a couple that I self-reverted) and I won't engage in any edit-war. Joe Capricorn (talk) 19:56, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Joe Capricorn If you've been added to the report, it's because there's a good-faith concern that you are a party to the situation, especially in light of your low edit count. —C.Fred (talk) 04:44, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- I can see how the concern could be brought, since I am not terribly active on Wikipedia, but I am not a party per se, but galamity did message folks on the Metal-Archives discord and I figured I'd look into it. No intention of causing trouble! Joe Capricorn (talk) 05:47, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Joe Capricorn
…but galamity did message folks on the Metal-Archives discord…
Quoting from WP:MEATPUPPET:Some individuals may promote their causes by bringing like-minded editors into the dispute, including enlisting assistance off-wiki. These editors are sometimes referred to as meatpuppets…
—C.Fred (talk) 11:51, 14 February 2024 (UTC)- I see. I guess I interpreted the term "meat puppet" to mean a literal alt, not a separate individual taking a user's side.
- I did involve myself on my own volition though, and I did tell galamity that edit warring isn't likely to produce a desirable outcome. Joe Capricorn (talk) 15:04, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Joe Capricorn
- I can see how the concern could be brought, since I am not terribly active on Wikipedia, but I am not a party per se, but galamity did message folks on the Metal-Archives discord and I figured I'd look into it. No intention of causing trouble! Joe Capricorn (talk) 05:47, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
What makes you think that
Fangraphs is not an RS? And - for that matter -- that all blogs without exception are not RSs? 2603:7000:2101:AA00:5837:9D9C:6FE8:2843 (talk) 01:55, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- WP:RSOPINION and WP:USERG both cover why blogs are not reliable. —C.Fred (talk) 01:57, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- Not only are newsblogs potential RSs, but sources may be considered reliable when work in the relevant field by the source has previously been published by reliable, independent publications. Are you suggesting that Fangraphs is not an RS? If so, there are loads of entries that should be deleted at the project. --2603:7000:2101:AA00:5837:9D9C:6FE8:2843 (talk) 02:00, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- And why in the world are your restoring a non-opinion. Asserting as your basis WP:RSOPINION? I don't get it?
- And you assert that Fangraphs is not an RS. Have you even explored that that is the case? Looked at whether it meets our RS criteria? Notice that it is in the wp template for every single major league baseball player on wikipedia? Are we wasting time here?
It's in 9,655 Wikipedia articles. Is this a joke? --2603:7000:2101:AA00:5837:9D9C:6FE8:2843 (talk) 02:06, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- I've not found anything yet that says it is a reliable source, although it is a valid external link to include in articles, particularly for players. —C.Fred (talk) 02:14, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- This is in an article for a player! And we only include in that template what the community finds to be RSs.
- And this is the writer -- https://www.si.com/mlb/astros/author/leo-morgenstern
- A writer for Inside the Astros and Inside the Phillies on Sports Illustrated. His work has also appeared on Pitcher List, Baseball Prospectus, and SB Nation.
- And you can read all about Fangraphs at their site and see it meets wp requirements.
- And you can read at wp's rules how with a writer like this it's PERFECTLY APPROPRIATE to site him. He's cleary a writer in all manner of RSs on this subject.
- This is a waste of time caused by failure to do mere seconds of checking before reverting. That hurts the project. Assume good faith. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:5837:9D9C:6FE8:2843 (talk) 02:18, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- One, I don't see it in the template or suggested article. Two, not all external links are reliable sources. (Classic case in point: IMDB.) Three, I could not find the Fangraphs masthead to determine who wrote the article in question and, thus, whether it was a reliable source. —C.Fred (talk) 02:19, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- This is a waste of time caused by failure to do mere seconds of checking before reverting. That hurts the project. Assume good faith. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:5837:9D9C:6FE8:2843 (talk) 02:18, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- What don't you see? That template was formed our baseball experts after much discussion on the project's talk page, which you can find on wp. This isn't IMDB - just read its characteristics on its home page. Also, this is used both in the template and in all manner of articles. The article clearly states who wrote the article in question. I indicated it above. Don't you agree that sources may be considered reliable when work in the relevant field by the source has previously been published by reliable, independent publications? Are you questioning whether Sports Illustrated, for example, is an RS? 2603:7000:2101:AA00:5837:9D9C:6FE8:2843 (talk) 02:26, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- Sports Illustrated is a separate discussion outside the scope of this discussion, but as a general statement, historically SI is reliable. Again, you have failed to prevent evidence that Fangraphs is reliable and independent. Further, where is said template? If it's at WP:BASEBALL, it's not anywhere obvious. —C.Fred (talk) 02:28, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- What don't you see? That template was formed our baseball experts after much discussion on the project's talk page, which you can find on wp. This isn't IMDB - just read its characteristics on its home page. Also, this is used both in the template and in all manner of articles. The article clearly states who wrote the article in question. I indicated it above. Don't you agree that sources may be considered reliable when work in the relevant field by the source has previously been published by reliable, independent publications? Are you questioning whether Sports Illustrated, for example, is an RS? 2603:7000:2101:AA00:5837:9D9C:6FE8:2843 (talk) 02:26, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- Here's a nice discussion about an editor being blocked indefinitely for among other things arguing against consensus that Fangraphs is not an RS, and deleting it. JUst search for Fangraphs on the page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Community_sanction/Archive10
- And SI is indeed within scope. Because ,, and I asked you if you disagree and you did not .. sources may be considered reliable when work in the relevant field by the source has previously been published by reliable, independent publications? 2603:7000:2101:AA00:5837:9D9C:6FE8:2843 (talk) 02:41, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- I need to search the archives to see if there has been a recent discussion on SI in light of the AI incidents. —C.Fred (talk) 12:24, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- And the community sanctions discussion does not address whether Fangraphs is a reliable source, only whether to include it as an external link. There is a difference. —C.Fred (talk) 12:25, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- Since there is no clarity on whether FanGraphs columns/blogs/articles are RS, I have escalated this to RSN, at WP:RSN#FanGraphs as a source, not just an external link. —C.Fred (talk) 12:42, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- Finally, regarding
sources may be considered reliable when work in the relevant field by the source has previously been published by reliable, independent publications
: The operative word is "may"; it does not imply reliability in all cases. For instance, work by TMZ is widely published by reliable, independent publications, but there is no consensus to deem TMZ itself as reliable. —C.Fred (talk) 12:46, 20 February 2024 (UTC)- I'm confused by your parsing of "may" in context. Of course we won't say "must" or "should" or "had better." Because use of any ref - if it is acceptable - is a matter of choice by the editor considering using the source. Here, may indicates that it is permitted. As in "is permitted to do the following." As in, "you may now withdraw your retirement funds." We can understand this from context. Anyway, as to RSN, if my ability to convince you is not effective, of course that sounds like a great idea. If you are undertain as to whether SI is a reliable source, you may (this is a case of "not permission," in this particular context) wish to post that there also. One last point. You speak of the use of the blog source - which you deleted - being about opinion, not facts. Have you checked? I am not sure that is correct. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:5837:9D9C:6FE8:2843 (talk) 17:17, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
Dr. Coal
Hello. I hope this finds you well. There is a User from the Turkish Wiki you deleted due to vandalism back in 2021, Dr. Coal. He is back and accusing me of Sockpuppetry even though I am innocent. He is vandalizing pages I have made and took time to edit. I have no objections to a sockpuppet investigation opened on me, I have had two in the past and I have no problem whatsoever with a third, but the way he is handling it is extremely unprofessional. Kindly advice. Serrwinner (talk) 21:58, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi C.Fred!
- I hope you're doing fine. I wanted to share some insights regarding the message above.
- Firstly, as far as I'm concerned, sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry may not have found place here on en.wiki but I think keeping this in mind should be of help in the future. In this regard, IP check is not always useful since it's absolutely -and unfortunately- no big deal to get over, especially when it comes to meatpuppetry. The user already stated here: "A random guy sent me an email (which I have been receiving over the last year or so asking for help) asking me to help out and check out his page." There is no way to be certainly sure of it, but even this single statement makes suspicion of a puppetry "reasonable". So, this is not a thought I make up myself. By the way, it could mean more if I told you that the user created the "almost same article" (impossible to be coincidental) in Turkish on tr.wiki which other puppets also had and was first created on the 5th of February. Even an IP user told here that the person, subject of the article, asked for help to get the article created. Anyways, I wanted to explain this part so you wouldn't get a false impression about my acts.
- The article in hand is Yasin Şöhret. You see, it was moved to draft and then came back to main page etc. Even Ldm1954 wrote here: "I think you have done a good job with the improvements, but others may not agree -- many are harsher than I am!" Tags regarding notability and sources build the context of this message. So, as someone who saw the article both in Turkish and in English, and whose native language is Turkish, I found the sources not satisfying since they were either primary or not "about" the subject, such as listing the subject's name or mentioning incidentally. This last correspondence between me and Serrwinner shows that they might not be able to understand Turkish since they were able to challenge their ban on tr.wiki which is written on their talk page on tr.wiki and apparently didn't know (understand) that. If that's the case, I think I have the right to ask, how they can be so sure that the subject is notable and sources prove it? Because they should be sure to remove the tags three times (1, 2, 3) without saying anything about the tags' (in)legitimacy? Far from doing this, they told repeatedly (1, 2: "STOP DELETING THESE you vandal", 3) what I did was vandalism. How could they call it vandalism if they have no idea about the content of the sources they added? They told "there are tons of secondary sources" and this is exactly what "refbomb" is about. Either way, I don't think it was appropriate to remove the tags without saying anything about it, especially regarding what Ldm1954 told them only 3 days ago.
- Even though I deleted the article on tr.wiki, I just wanted to tag it here since our guidelines in this regard may somewhat differ, and it would be the best if the community here on en.wiki oversee it.
- Please accept my sincere apologies for the headache I caused. I hope to get in touch in the future for nicer reasons.
- Best,
- Dr. CoalMessage 23:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
- Unfortunately Dr. Coal has misrepresented my discussion with Serrwinner about Yasin Şöhret. I worked with Serrwinner to improve the article after I draftified it. I think he has done a reasonable job, and had the option to either go via WP:AfC or create himself so it goes through new page review. He chose the latter.
- IMHO notability is not something that Dr. Coal should be questioning until others have reviewed his contributions and he has New Page reviewer rights or more. I think his various edits (which Serrwinner has been reverting) are inappropriate. Leave it to the New Page reviewer. Ldm1954 (talk) 23:43, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining this, Ldm1954. I didn't know that such a user group exists and they would do it if necessary.
- However, my edits in hand which were reverted cannot be described as "vandalism" and the essence of disagreement still stands. I'm at least glad that I might have drawn attention for further inspection.
- Best,
- Dr. CoalMessage 23:59, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Serrwinner Please clarify your statement that I deleted (sic) this user due to vandalism in 2021. What was their prior account, if they were blocked then? —C.Fred (talk) 01:00, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi again,
- It's just a misunderstanding. As I told Serrwinner here, you deleted my userpage in 2021.
- Best,
- Dr. CoalMessage 01:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
- Ahhh. *checks archives* Yes. User:Dr. Coal was the target of a vandal's attack. I deleted the page to remove the grossly inappropriate attack from the history. @Serrwinner: I suppose I should consider the possibility that Dr. Coal is the target of an attack again, yes? —C.Fred (talk) 12:42, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
- Dear C.Fred,
- I'm truly sorry that I intervene this much, but there seems to be another misunderstanding now. Let me explain what it is all about by breaking it into small pieces. (Details already above.)
- I tried to tag the article "Yasin Şöhret" (See history) in terms of notability concerns.
- Serrwinner thought (and told) that it was vandalism. (Diff links above.)
- They came to my user / user talk page (obviously) and saw that you deleted my user page once.
- They completely misunderstood it and thought I was blocked by you because of vandalism.
- They wrote here so to imply that I was back and vandalising, which is completely inaccurate.
- I hope I could be of help to figure things out.
- Best,
- Dr. CoalMessage 14:07, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
- Ahhh. *checks archives* Yes. User:Dr. Coal was the target of a vandal's attack. I deleted the page to remove the grossly inappropriate attack from the history. @Serrwinner: I suppose I should consider the possibility that Dr. Coal is the target of an attack again, yes? —C.Fred (talk) 12:42, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Haplgroup F
Hi I just wanted to talk about haplgroup F. Someone edited it recently just to remove text and changed the orgins of haplgroup F to west Asia with older sources. purposly targeting to remove South Asia from the text https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Haplogroup_F-M89&diff=prev&oldid=1199832154&title=Haplogroup_F-M89&diffonly=1 also originally you see it says South Asia orgins. With sources https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Haplogroup_F-M89&diff=prev&oldid=1156823998&title=Haplogroup_F-M89&diffonly=1
these are nationalist from iran purposly not wanting to expose to the world that haplgroup F orgins being in South Asia.
as you can see in this edit sources that mention South Asia where removed which you reverted https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Haplogroup_F-M89&diff=prev&oldid=1107888044&title=Haplogroup_F-M89&diffonly=1
Here you can see recently they edited by another user into west Asia to remove South Asia on purpose using older sources. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Haplogroup_F-M89&diff=prev&oldid=1199832344&title=Haplogroup_F-M89&diffonly=1 Zishan12345 (talk) Zishan12345 (talk) 08:36, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Phase I of the 2024 RfA review is now open for participation. Editors are invited to review, comment on, and propose improvements to the requests for adminship process.
- Following an RfC, the inactivity requirement for the removal of the interface administrator right increased from 6 months to 12 months.
Technical news
- The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)
Miscellaneous
- The 2024 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Doǵu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, MdsShakil, Minorax, Nehaoua, Renvoy and RoySmith as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
- Following the 2024 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Ajraddatz, Albertoleoncio, EPIC, JJMC89, Johannnes89, Melos and Yahya.
Is it okay if you check my work on 2,000 zlotych note?
I just published the page 2,000 złotych note, and I want you to check it. PolskiSlaskiegokowa! (talk) 15:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for expanding my ancestors Wikipedia page
Thank you for expanding the Wikipedia page of Samuel Jordan. My Family respects the work you guys put in to help it.- The Jordan's 2601:244:8300:48C0:9C7D:8148:6B3E:740F (talk) 04:57, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
I apologize
Dear C.Fred, I'm deeply sorry for engaging in an edit war. I am just deeply passionate about following the rules and I got carried away (plus I'm still pretty new here). I will never do it again. Autisticeditor 20 (talk) 22:32, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Permission to add files of all banknotes of old Polish złoty, counterfeit and old legal tender. (from 10 to 500,000,000 złotych.)
I apoligize for the copyright issue at the 2,000 złotych files, and forgot to ask permission. I want to reupload those files and TRY to follow the copyright rules. I am right now in the process of making a 5,000 złotych note draft.
Thank you.
Sincerely and apologetically, PolskiSlaskiegokowa! (aka in real life Marek Cholewicki.) PolskiSlaskiegokowa! (talk) 01:08, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
About BlueSpectre5
This new editor appears to have WP:COMPETENCY issues, in addition to the test edits at WP:RPPI, they insist that their articles are ready for mainspace when the articles clearly are not. Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Supercard_of_Honor_(2024)&diff=prev&oldid=1213838494 –Skywatcher68 (talk) 13:59, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
Is it okay if you check my work on 5,000 złotych note draft?
Just finished Draft:5,000 złotych note. Can you check it? PolskiSlaskiegokowa! (talk) 11:29, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Edit summary
Hello C.Fred, can you hide this revision edit summary? Thanks. Wooze (talk) 02:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Tessa Violet's DOB
Hi @C.Fred, I saw that you reverted the changes to that I made in regards to Tessa Violet's date of birth. You claimed that the cited source that uses for the information wasn't a reliable source. To the best of my knowledge, It should follow all the relevant guidelines and I got the approval of @Toddst1 to use the source (see User talk:Toddst1). I would prefer not to continue to have an editing battle with Wikipedia admin over this, so can you explain why the source is "unreliable" in this instance? Madalyn the Rose (talk) 02:28, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Madalyn the Rose The source is user-generated content, since it derives from contributions by general editors. Such sources are generally unacceptable. —C.Fred (talk) 05:18, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar |
| Thank you for your persistent anti-vandalism efforts and please keep up the good work! CanonNi (talk) 12:47, 24 March 2024 (UTC) |
- Thats a strange title to give someone like you. InsurgentOwl (talk) 02:11, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
I am a human being.
|
I am a new user. |
| I want to talk to a human being. InsurgentOwl (talk) 02:11, 26 March 2024 (UTC) |
- @InsurgentOwl What's your question? —C.Fred (talk) 02:12, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
About accepting a wikipage edit
Hello sir,
Myself Dharmarajsinh , we had talked yesterday if you remember. So as in our wikiproject, one of my colleague Jayesh gohel1111 have done editing of wikipage Breast Cancer , where in types of cancers he added some information about Krukenberg's Tumour and also a image related to it and also made proper citation and reference
But the edit is not normally seen now , it shows that it need to be accepted so only it would be further seen.Can you do something about it sir ? Rathod Dharmarajsinh (talk) 10:12, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Rathod Dharmarajsinh Taking a look at the Breast cancer article, the edits in question have, correctly, been reverted by another editor as being unrelated to the topic of breast cancer. Krukenberg tumors have their own article, as was noted in the edit summary of the revert. —C.Fred (talk) 13:05, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
List of substances used in rituals
I hope this message finds you well. I wanted to touch base regarding the recent changes made to List of substances used in rituals. I noticed that some of the work I had put in was reverted without prior discussion. I understand that we all have different perspectives and approaches, and I value collaboration and open communication in our team. In the future, I kindly request that we discuss any significant changes before implementing them to ensure alignment and avoid any unintentional setbacks. Clear communication is key to our success, and I believe that by working together and sharing our thoughts, we can achieve even better results. I appreciate your understanding and look forward to discussing this further with you. Thank you for your attention to this matter. --94.255.152.53 (talk) 03:16, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Kali Muscle revert
I went ahead and reverted your revert. No context has changed. Look at the diff before assuming/reverting things. – Brenr 05:22, March 31, 2024 (UTC) 05:22, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Brenr I did. The "known professionally as" clause makes clear that it's a stage name. Leading with the "Kali Muscle" name implies that it's a legal name. It's a subtle thing with biographies, but it makes a difference. —C.Fred (talk) 12:29, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
- See Kanye West for an example. Also, you're reverting wikilinks and formatting that is not related to the reason of your revert. – Brenr 17:09, March 31, 2024 (UTC) 17:09, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
- See another example, Lil Wayne. I also fixed the Person infobox, so please refrain from further edits. – Brenr 17:13, March 31, 2024 (UTC) 17:13, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
|
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar |
| Thank you for saving Wikipedia by removing unnecessary discusions. PolskiSlaskiegokowa! (talk) 22:38, 31 March 2024 (UTC) |
Administrators' newsletter – April 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).
Administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC is open to convert all current and future community discretionary sanctions to (community designated) contentious topics procedure.
Technical news
- The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)
Arbitration
- An arbitration case has been opened to look into "the intersection of managing conflict of interest editing with the harassment (outing) policy".
Miscellaneous
- Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.
Corey Rutgers Wikipedia page
Hi. I was asked by Corey Rutgers to create a proper profile page with the text that he provided me. One of the first things I had to do, was remove the auto-redirect to his Wikipage, as it transferred it directly to Belgian Cricket team page. Naturally, this is not helpful for Corey, as it basically by-passes his biog which I have now set up on his behalf. I have included a link to the Belgian Cricket team in his biog. Anglobreton (talk) 19:22, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Anglobreton Thank you for disclosing your conflict of interest. This is all the more reason you should not attempt to create a page. I'll follow up at your talk, but in short, since the community has already deemed him not notable, I'll be moving your draft to draft space. —C.Fred (talk) 20:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is COI and possible legal threats at Bennett S. LeBow (BLP). Thank you. Wracking talk! 04:54, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
| For bringing me some amusement here. Cheers! JeffSpaceman (talk) 23:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
Sorry
His last words were not said by him, but by John I of Johnsburg instead, who also happened to be a Nazi. So, I confused the two. It will not happen again, thank you.
- TrueReveration TrueReveriation (talk) 01:24, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
John Paul (scientist)
Hi. Thank you for commenting on the speedy deleted article. I'm a beginner on Wikipedia. I spent months writing an article then hours editing the article in response to comments made by Wikipedia editors. It was about a scientist who worked in Scotland and was deceased at the end of last century. I still am not sure how it breaches copyright violations but certainly no-one stands to gain in any way, publicity or otherwise from the article. I would prefer not to have to rework the entire article. Is there not an old copy of it on Wikipedia somewhere? Gcwcd (talk) 16:38, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- P.S. Thanks for being available to talk. I doesn't seem possible to talk to the person who speedy deleted it. Gcwcd (talk) 16:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Gcwcd As I noted, the old copy was speedy deleted because of copyright concerns. It is still in the system archive and accessible by administrators. You can ask at WP:Requests for undeletion if somebody is willing to mail you a copy of the text. I don't email old text myself. —C.Fred (talk) 17:14, 9 April 2024 (UTC)