User talk:Iljhgtn/Archive 2023

Hello, Iljhgtn, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! Ahunt (talk) 19:57, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Getting started

• Introduction
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Intuitive guide to Wikipedia

Finding your way around

• Table of contents
• Directories and indexes
• Department directory

Editing articles

• How to develop an article
• Simplified Manual of Style

Getting help

• Frequently asked questions
• Cheatsheet
• Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse
• The Help Desk, for more advanced questions
• Help pages
• Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles

How you can help

• Community Portal
• Join a WikiProject
• Follow Wikipedia etiquette
• Practice civility
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Disambiguation link notification for June 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cactus's Secret, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alien. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

i think it was okay, but i can check again Iljhgtn (talk) 13:57, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

changed it just now to a another page, what is a "disambiguation page" @Mike Turnbull Iljhgtn (talk) 15:24, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

A "disambiguation page" is a Wikipedia page that just consists of links to articles that the reader might have been looking for when they landed on that page. The one at Alien is actually a good example. Unless there is a specific reason for linking to a page like that, in most cases it is an error caused by not checking links inserted. The real target for the link is usually one of the choices on that page, as you found in this case, however. Hope that helps! - Ahunt (talk) 15:51, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

i updated that, so i think it should be better now, i will avoid these "disambiguation pages" being linked now. Iljhgtn (talk) 15:55, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Yup, you fixed it just fine! Whenever I enter a link in an article I always check it before saving, unless I am 100% sure where it goes. - Ahunt (talk) 16:10, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

cool Iljhgtn (talk) 16:11, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Please don't link words that everyone knows

Per MOS:OVERLINK "Unless a term is particularly relevant to the context in the article, the following are usually not linked: Everyday words understood by most readers in context (e.g., education, violence, aircraft, river)" Miner Editor (talk) 16:44, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

what words are ok? Iljhgtn (talk) 16:44, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Please read MOS:UL. There are a number of things we like to consider before linking something and it requires an involved explanation. I recommend reading MOS:UL and MOS:OVERLINK. Miner Editor (talk) 16:50, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

it says that even wiktionary could be used in some cases. i'll need to keep that in mind as an option too. {{ping|Miner Editor}} Iljhgtn (talk) 13:50, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Again at Peter Quallo. Robby.is.on (talk) 21:05, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

i commonly see a nationality linked

i did not link directly to the nation too, but rather to Germans. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:09, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Have you read MOS:OVERLINK as suggested above? It lists "nationalities, ethnicities or descent (e.g., British, Chinese, Turkish, African American, Nigerian)" as things that should usually not be linked. Robby.is.on (talk) 21:11, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

when is it acceptable to link, i see it frequently linked Iljhgtn (talk) 21:13, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

I see nationalities rarely linked, not frequently but even if that were so it would probably be in violation of the Manual of Style. MOS:OVERLINK tries to explain when it is acceptable to link. Please read it and ask if there's something you don't understand. Robby.is.on (talk) 21:18, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

i will unlink those then when i come across them on the random articles Iljhgtn (talk) 21:21, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Good. That is something I frequently do. ;-) Happy editing, Robby.is.on (talk) 21:23, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

you too Iljhgtn (talk) 21:24, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

WP:ENGVAR; quotes

I've noticed that a lot of your copyedits seem fine, but in some cases you've been changing Commonwealth English spellings to American spellings for no reason. This is fine if the topic has {{Use American English}}, or if it's a topic strongly connected to the US, or if you're bringing certain spellings in line with those used throughout the article, but this is a global project and spellings like "armour", "utilise, and "traveller" are not incorrect. The WP:ENGVAR guidance would be good to familiarise yourself with.

I have also seen that some of your edits make changes to quotes. Please don't change anything that is a direct quote. If there's something obviously incorrect you can use {{sic}}, but if it's a comma you'd prefer or not prefer, or a change in wording, they should be left as they are. Folly Mox (talk) 06:41, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

that makes sense, though i think if i change the spellings it usually does correspond to a american/usa page. i am in virginia, so that is what i am most familiar with. Iljhgtn (talk) 14:57, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Ok, that's fair if you're only changing spellings to US English on America-affiliated pages. I could have done a more thorough job checking the geographical context of the articles where you've been doing that. Happy editing, Folly Mox (talk) 00:40, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Teahouse post

Hi, I just replied to your teahouse post looking for good small articles. I listed the smallest featured articles. Also, here is a list of WP:Good Articles that clock in under 10kb. The Good Article and Featured Article pages both have talk or discussion pages where you can also ask for some solid examples of small articles. Regards, Rjjiii (talk) 04:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

could you add that list back here as well please? so i can refer the them if needed in the future. thanks Iljhgtn (talk) 15:35, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

I'll do you four better.

1. Petscan can generate all kinds of lists, like this one of Featured Articles below 15k.
2. To see the estimated word count, you can activate Wikipedia:Prosesize just by checking the box here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences#mw-input-wpgadget-Prosesize Once it's active, you can click the "Page size" button in the tools menu.
3. You can get a permanent link by clicking on the page's history tab. Like this version of the Teahouse page with your recent questions: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse&oldid=1162269539
4. And finally, you create a custom scratch page within your user space. For example, you could go to the User:Iljhgtn/Tools page which currently does not exist, click the "Start the User:Iljhgtn/Tools page", and paste any useful Wikipedia stuff you find there for later reference.

Rjjiii (talk) 05:14, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

kk cool. i just added that stuff, if you have anything else, go ahead and add it too Iljhgtn (talk) 18:32, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Removing unsourced content

Hi Iljhgtn,

I noticed that you have been deleting a lot of unsourced content. I checked a lot of these deletions. I think that in almost all cases that I reviewed your deletions are correct, especially because most follow old citation needed tags. So, keep up the good work!Grieg2 (talk) 18:43, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

July 2023

Hello, I'm Paul 012. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you unlinked one or more redlinks. Redlinks are useful and can often be helpful, so we don't remove them just because they are red. They help improve Wikipedia by attracting editors to create needed articles.

In addition, clicking on the "What links here" link (in the tools listed at the left in desktop view) on a missing article shows how many—and which—articles depend on that article being created. This can help prioritize article creation. Please only remove a redlink if you are pretty sure that it is to a non-notable topic and not likely ever to be created. Thanks! Paul_012 (talk) 03:17, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

could you cite some example of redlinks that i removed that is a problem? i try to only remove them when it seems obvious that there is not going to be an article about the subject any time in the near future. Iljhgtn (talk) 17:31, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Actually, I don't think it's really a problem, but I thought it was worth pointing out that neither is it necessary, or always helpful. The first of your edits I noticed was at "Military career of Napoleon Bonaparte", where you removed a red link from "Battle of San Giorgio". I think it's a judgement call. The battle is mentioned briefly at "Siege_of_Mantua_(1796–1797)", but might merit a page of its own. Looking through a few more of your edits it wasn't clear to me that you understood that red links do (in some cases) serve a purpose. The red links at "Aricoris" were, I think, not a problem. I reverted your edit at "Tumtum and Nutmeg" because of the red link issue, because your edit introduced a small formatting error, and because your edit introduced inconsistency between "Mr" and "Mrs" (acceptable in British English) and "Mr." and "Mrs.", leaving the former in the lead paragraph. The book Tumtum and Nutmeg uses the former style. Likewise in "Blithe Spirit (play), "wilful" is a valid British spelling, and Blithe Spirit is a British play.

None of these is a big deal, but you're making lots of edits. A lot of them are helpful, but some are not, and many are just a matter of preference. Could I make a friendly suggestion? Why not slow down a bit? It's not a race. Best wishes, Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 22:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

I'd like to echo the above. Please don't delete red links just because they are red. Wikipedia is a work in progress, and red links are often a useful signal of work to be done. Best wishes, Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 09:16, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

August 2023

Hello. In a recent edit to the page Scandinavian diaspora, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the first author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. TylerBurden (talk) 20:37, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback

Hello, Iljhgtn/Archive 2023. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by #prodraxis ^connect 20:18, 25 August 2023 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Manual of Style and hyphens in "African-American" before a noun

I saw that you requested AutoWikibrowser in order to remove hyphens from "African-American". Note that this is often already proper usage under Wikipedia's Manual of Style (hyphens point 3: compound modifiers) when preceding a noun, such as African-American culture. (See that article's Requested move 23 June 2021, where there was a consensus not to move the page to African American culture.)

For illustration, hyphenation in line with the Manual of Style would be:

• The artist was African American.
• She was an African-American artist.

The edit that you made just before asking about this at the Teahouse, Special:Diff/1172208499, goes against this. That change would not be an appropriate use of AutoWikiBrowser under WP:AWBRULES. Bot-like edits (such as with AWB) are not appropriate when there is not consensus for the sort of change being done — and especially not when there is a guideline or consensus against it.

(And just to be clear, it would be up to someone else to approve or decline your request for access to AWB. I am not an administrator. And I would have sent this at the Teahouse, but your question there has already been archived.) SilverLocust 💬 20:59, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't notice MOS:HYPHEN had been edited last year to say that this hyphen should be avoided. SilverLocust 💬 21:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

that is a good point about the page African-American culture.. it looks like the discussion is outdated that wanted to keep the hyphen. i tried to move it to no hyphen just now and i got this error message "The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists". if you can correct this that would be cool. Iljhgtn (talk) 22:27, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Please stop removing content

If it says citation needed, instead of removing that info, look for sources to support it instead. We have that tag because a lot times it's true, just not sourced. If it's clearly not a fact or relevant to the article, then remove it. Thank you! Masterhatch (talk) 21:10, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Again, please stop removing content. That citation needed tag does not mean "please remove this info". If it did, the info would have been removed and we wouldn't need that citation needed tag. So, please stop removing content. Masterhatch (talk) 18:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

• Looks like you're still up to removing content. Please stop. Really, citation needed does not mean remove. It is much better to try and confirm or proove otherwise than to simply remove something with a citation needed tag. Masterhatch (talk) 13:51, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

  lots of times i leave content that has the citation needed tag, i removed it when i cannot find a source, and when it has been many years since added and no sources seems to be publicly verifiable. Iljhgtn (talk) 13:54, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. Old tags still aren't code for delete me. You removed the citation tag for Gogołowa yet a quick googe search showed the population is readily available. Gogołowa population. So, I'm asking you to stop removing content unless you are completely sure it's false. Masterhatch (talk) 14:06, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

the source has to still be reliable, if it is a blog or some other unreliable source, it may be removed as unsourced. Iljhgtn (talk) 14:08, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

You speed through articles so fast, I'm not sure how you have the time to verify it before removing it. So, please stop unless you are sure. Masterhatch (talk) 14:10, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

i take my time when i see unsourced content, only a typo is fast Iljhgtn (talk) 14:11, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Take a look at this latest that I came across at Richard Wojciak. There is a citation needed tag from 2008 for the paragraph or so at the end, "Head coach Les Millie is delighted to have Richard on board. "Most people will associate Richard as being a forward but they couldn't be further from the truth, Richard is a natural defenceman and has had to adapt for other teams as they played him up front, he was eager to get back on the blue line and from the comments I've had from coaches and players he will be one of the best British Dmen in the league. Mike Ellis of the Nottingham Panthers also talks highly of Richard and was one of the contacts i spoke at length about with this signing."

let me know what you would do with that? Iljhgtn (talk) 14:13, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

also, on Gogołowa, there were a couple different aspects to that edit, including a wikilink which includes the first instance of the country appearing, which is part of MOS standard. why did you revert the edit completely? as opposed to just the part that you might have disagreed with? also, the source you added is unreliable, so unless you can find a better one, then the edit at Gogołowa should be reverted again back to not showing unsourced claims or content. Iljhgtn (talk) 14:15, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

also, what do you recommend for "circular references"? i have left those alone so far, but do you have any comment on those? here is an example at this article i just saw, Zharmakhan Tuyakbay. Iljhgtn (talk) 14:19, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

It was a quick search to see if that info was available and I grabbed the first one. Did you even go that far before removing the stat? As for linking Poland, we don't need to link common terms. Masterhatch (talk) 14:20, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

linking nation names is acceptable from what i read on this. i did check, but that source is not reliable. Iljhgtn (talk) 14:22, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Gaston VI, Viscount of Béarn has tags citing citation needed from 2009, and it does not appear as if much of this content can be sourced to a reliable source, and thus should be removed. i will let you take a look as well before i act on it so that you see that proper due diligence is done. Iljhgtn (talk) 14:24, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

also, it is not only "citation needed" content that i look at for deletion if the content is unsourced, that is all that matters. here is an example of a page where there is a line that may merit deletion on those grounds, Ja R-Siam. See if you and I agree on the line. it is early in the page. Iljhgtn (talk) 14:26, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm sure you've read Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Citation needed. They are clear about making sure everything is sourced and that's the angle you're coming from (and rightly so). Overall, I think you are definately improving Wikipedia as many of the "facts" you deleted were good edits. One paragraph in particular on the Wikipedia:Citation needed page says "If a statement sounds plausible, and is consistent with other statements in the article, but you doubt that it is totally accurate, then consider making a reasonable effort to find a reference yourself. In the process, you may end up confirming that the statement needs to be edited or deleted to better reflect the best knowledge about the topic." I just wanted to bring it to your attention to slow down a bit when removing citation needed tags from plausible statements as some of them shouldn't be so hastily deleted. Thank you. Masterhatch (talk) 17:52, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

thanks, but i think that is exactly what i am doing. i make different types of edits, not just removing unsourced content. if a quick google search returns only sketchy results, i remove the content as unsourced. i think we agree lol. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:17, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

I'd like to add that I agree with Masterhatch. The information I added to an article about Darius Miles was quite easy to find so I don't believe that you really make a good faith effort to find a source before removing information. Captainspirou (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:55, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

"i.e.," etc.

Hello again,

Just a note about punctuation in British English. The abbreviations "e.g." and "i.e." are not followed by a comma in British English, so it's generally not correct to add them on pages (like "Royal Standard of the United Kingdom") that use that regional style.

Also, a couple of times recently (at "Cyril Isenberg" and "Malcolm Gladwell") I noticed you'd changed a capital M for "Member" to lower case. In those examples, the word "Member" is part of a title, indicating the rank of award received, so should properly be capitalised.

Also, I noticed a couple of edits that suggest you hadn't understood the context of the article you were editing. Here, "hammer,less" became "hammerless", but should have been "hammer, less". Here, "large landed estates" was correct, but you made it "large-landed estates", which doesn't make sense.

I don't mean to nitpick. Many of your edits are good, but I suspect you're using some sort of software aid to guide your editing, and it may be leading you into errors at times. Why not slow down a little and take more time to understand the context of the articles you're editing?

Best wishes, Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 13:21, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

i just was looking at this article New Puilwa. it had an i.e.

what would you do with that one for example? Iljhgtn (talk) 15:51, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Personally, I would leave it as is. I'm not very familiar with Indian varieties of English, but I'd assume that, as a Commonwealth country, it's more likely to follow British English conventions. I think I might reword that "Tourist place list" sentence though. Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 16:58, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

ok Iljhgtn (talk) 22:57, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

"Dream hoarding" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Dream hoarding has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 6 § Dream hoarding until a consensus is reached. MicrobiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish•cultures)} 19:00, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

"Dream hoard" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Dream hoard has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 6 § Dream hoard until a consensus is reached. MicrobiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish•cultures)} 19:00, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

"Dream haorders" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Dream haorders has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 6 § Dream haorders until a consensus is reached. MicrobiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish•cultures)} 19:01, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

"Dream hoarders book" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Dream hoarders book has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 6 § Dream hoarders book until a consensus is reached. MicrobiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish•cultures)} 19:01, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Aella (data scientist) moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Aella (data scientist). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, 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 OR move the page back. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:30, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

how many soureces would you say? I found 4-7 that were on the perennial list in a quick google search if you did the WP:BEFORE? Iljhgtn (talk) 22:31, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Aella headshot from Reason.png

Thank you for uploading File:Aella headshot from Reason.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 03:44, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

CS1 error on Identity document

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Identity document, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:37, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Aella headshot from Reason.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Aella headshot from Reason.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:01, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Elon Musk

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Slatersteven (talk) 19:26, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

are you serious? Iljhgtn (talk) 19:40, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

i checked, and unless i missed the warning label, the elon musk page is not under WP:1RR or WP:0RR. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:48, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

But you are at 2rr. and it is always best to issue a warning before someone breaks a rule. Slatersteven (talk) 19:49, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

this doesn't look like the standard format to me for a first warning. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:50, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

plus i stopped a while back earlier today and have been on the talk page, so i am just a bit surprised why you thought this was necessary? Iljhgtn (talk) 19:51, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Becasue you continued to revert, whilst discussion (which you launched) was still ongoing. I note you are still reverting (other content) more than once (and by my reckoning you are now at 3RR). Slatersteven (talk) 11:05, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

that is the picture, and a different discussion, am i wrong? Iljhgtn (talk) 11:06, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

please feel free to revert my revert on that picture if i am wrong, but i was simply restoring the image that had been there prior and that i feel is of a higher quality in terms of resolution etc. i am not trying to edit war and i have completely dropped the matter regarding the stuff you and i were talking about.. Iljhgtn (talk) 11:08, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

as far as i see it, the original picture is of a higher resolution, and therefore, more helpful. the other picture is taken from some russian source that i cannot identify, and is more shadowy and lower resolution. Iljhgtn (talk) 11:10, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

if i have passed the threshold, i will self revert. Iljhgtn (talk) 11:12, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Actualy with the cite removal you are at 4rr, and it is down to you to revert your edit warring, not anyone else. As I said, I issued you the warning to prevent you from doing what you have done ("and it is always best to issue a warning before someone breaks a rule"), continuing to revert in violation of WP:ONUS WPbrd and wp:consensus. I also suggest you read wp:editwar as being right is not in fact a justification for it. Slatersteven (talk) 11:16, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

i will self revert. sorry Iljhgtn (talk) 11:18, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

i just reverted myself, i will leave that page alone for a bit then slatersteven. Iljhgtn (talk) 11:19, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

and believe it or not, i did not realize that 3RR applied to the same page. that is a good lesson. I thought it was just the same edit or section or material etc. good to know, just re-read WP:3rr now Iljhgtn (talk) 11:22, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Punctuation

I partially reverted your change here, because the passage quoted doesn't really show that Pryor despised Chase. It shows that Mooney was upset with Michaels. DS (talk) 18:55, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

i think we are both right in a way. it should end with a period, but text before opening to a block quote should have a colon to precede the block quote. Iljhgtn (talk) 20:28, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

National varieties of English

Hello. In a recent edit to the page Sergey Nechayev, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the first author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. asilvering (talk) 07:12, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

i know the british say "maths" and americans say "math", I chose the more neutral "mathematics", which all forms of english recognize so i do not believe that is a violation of WP:ENGVAR since it is just further clarifying and making the one word that was changed clearer for all global readers. Iljhgtn (talk) 12:51, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Descriptor links

In a disambiguation page or set index (including name pages), words in the descriptor are not supposed to be linked; the only thing to be linked in an item of a list is the main subject which the item refers to. Thank you for your contributions. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 01:41, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

is that an official rule somewhere? Iljhgtn (talk) 12:54, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

It's a guideline in the Manual of Style at MOS:DABENTRY: "Include exactly one navigable (blue) link to efficiently guide readers to the most relevant article for that use of the ambiguous term. Do not wikilink any other words in the line."

Best wishes, Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 14:14, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

thanks Iljhgtn (talk) 14:19, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

CS1 error on Geolibertarianism

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Geolibertarianism, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 14:07, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

CS1 error on The Capitalist Manifesto (disambiguation)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page The Capitalist Manifesto (disambiguation), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 23:06, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Capitalist Manifesto (disambiguation)

Hello Iljhgtn,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username FULBERT and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged an article that you started, The Capitalist Manifesto (disambiguation) for deletion, because it is unnecessary per one of the criteria at WP:G14.

If you feel that the page shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|FULBERT}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

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

FULBERT (talk) 00:42, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

i am working on the other two pages over the next couple of days. any way i could have a bit more time before you do? Iljhgtn (talk) 00:45, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

might take me longer though, so its no big deal if you need to delete things first. i will get around to this whenever i do. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:00, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

MOS:ERA

Hello,

I saw your edit here. Changing the era style of an article is not fixing a "style error". If you're not familiar with it, see MOS:ERA - both BC and BCE are valid. Neither are wrong or broken. They can be changed, but only by the major editors / maintainers of an article; doing it as a "passerby" is asking for an edit war. Also, in articles not about time scales themself, there's no need to wikilink Common Era or Anno Domini. Additionally, your edit summary was not very accurate. I see you're using the same edit summary in many edits despite them changing different things. An accurate summary of your edit would have been something like "Changing the date style from BC to BCE because [insert reason here]." Now, this is fairly minor, and luckily I'm the maintainer and don't really care whether that article uses BC or BCE, but I'm warning you now that this isn't a good habit to get into. And if you do it anyway, please use an informative edit summary, not one that claims it's making "fixes". SnowFire (talk) 20:00, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

what is a maintainer? Iljhgtn (talk) 20:04, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Just the normal English meaning, no special Wikipedia term. Someone who's edited the content and keeps an eye on it on their watchlist to stop vandalism, mostly.

Basically, there's another guideline, WP:OWNERSHIP, that states that nobody "owns" an article. However, in practice, it's common for there to be "stewards" and the like who keep an eye on a specific article. Stewards shouldn't (and can't) stop content modifications, but for style preferences where there are many valid answers, it's generally considered good form to defer. For example, a passerby editor fixing a typo or misspelling everywhere is fine. A passerby editor who takes a word with two valid spellings and finds every usage of one spelling and changes it to the other is not so fine - let whatever the original editor's preference is stand. SnowFire (talk) 20:54, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

is steward a "special Wikipedia term" then? Iljhgtn (talk) 21:00, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

No. But you're fixating on the wrong part here.

Short version: if you are writing your own content, or making major revisions, use whatever style you like. You're in charge!

If you are "just passing through", then fixing errors is great, but don't "fix" things that are style choices where both options are valid. SnowFire (talk) 22:30, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

I just reverted you at Royal Air Force for essentially the same reason you were just advised about above. In this case, it involves a style choice about whether or not to remove the hyphen in "tandem-seat". You removed it, but it's not clear why. (Your potted summary of Spelling/grammar/punctuation/typographical correction did not help answer that question; see next section.) A quick check of ngrams shows no overwhelming preference for one style over the other. Please take to heart the good advice that SnowFire gave you, and refrain from this type of edit in the future. Thank you. Mathglot (talk) 19:51, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

looking at royal air force, i saw that i removed a period and replaced it with a colon before a block quote. That is common practice and part of correct MOS if i am not mistaken. if that part is correct, should i go back and fix just that part again, or do you want to? Iljhgtn (talk) 20:13, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

I may have missed that; if I removed a proper colon I will replace it; stand by. Mathglot (talk) 20:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

no problem mathglot Iljhgtn (talk) 20:17, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

I had a look; the colon you added was in section § Non-flying training following the words "...and communication and information systems", but the period that was there before ended a complete sentence and was fine as it was; it didn't need to be changed to a colon. Also, I see no block quote or any kind of quote after it; rather, there are three bullet items each consisting of full sentences, not fragments; a colon would not be standard punctuation to end a sentence preceding them. Perhaps a colon is a style variant there (not one I would choose), but even if so, there was no reason to make the change. And if by some reason there was support for such a style variant, then why did you not make the same change in the same situation in the immediately preceding section, § Flying training, which also had a sentence ending in a period introducing some bullet items? All you did there was make the article inconsistent in its use of punctuation, assuming your choice was even viable in the first place.

Please go back and re-read what SnowFire wrote, and heed his good advice. Wikipedia has a WP:Manual of style which governs what style choices we use here, when there are two or more options; SnowFire linked MOS:ERA for you, as an example. I would like to see you better grounded in the Manual of style, and include a specific MOS link in the summary of any edit you choose to make that involves substituting one style for another, showing that your change conforms to this or that section of MOS. This is standard practice; for example, here are numerous examples of my edits where I referred to MOS: to justify an edit I was making. You can do the same, and I hope you will. Mathglot (talk) 20:40, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

are you british by the way? Iljhgtn (talk) 21:07, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

consistency across an article is what i aim for. if there is one style, it should be the same across the entire article. i agree. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:10, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Please stop using potted edit summaries; write an appropriate one for each edit

I notice that 328 of your last 500 edits contain the edit summary "Spelling/grammar/punctuation/typographical correction", either on its own, or with additional plug-ins like "Fixing style/layout errors" (128 times). I know you are capable of writing a proper edit summary because you occasionaly do, such as "undid warping of infobox image" at Javier Milei or "source has full list of examples, retained key material" at Ashburn Colored School. Those are examples of good edit summaries because they are unique to the edit in question, and describe the intent of your edit to improve the article. However, good ones like these are relatively rare currently; going forward, please make sure that each edit summary you write is appropriate for the change you are making to the article. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 19:37, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

why are there dropdowns of edit summaries if we are not supposed to use them when the edit in question is just that, "Spelling/grammar/punctuation/typographical correction" "Fixing style/layout errors" etc.?

it would be helpful if they could add more to the dropdown list. i like using it and would plan to continue using it unless i feel that the edit summary truly cannot describe the type of edit that i am trying to make.

lastly, how do you get to see that so easily? sounds like another interesting tool that i'd be open to learning how to use for viewing my past edits. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:52, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

what does "potted" mean by the way? i see them in the dropdown selection of edit summaries since i first explored what was available to me from the gadgets section. i don't remember them being described as "potted"? Iljhgtn (talk) 19:54, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Dropdown entries contain suggestions as a starting point, but you don't have to accept them and you shouldn't if they are inaccurate. As far as the meaning of certain words, wiktionary may help you. As far as how I got to see that, I simply clicked the "History" tab top right, then clicked "500", then I did a search-on-page (Ctrl+F in many browsers) for your edit summary, and my browser gave me the count. That said, there is a tool for it, and you can find it here. I hope you can see scanning that list, how unhelpful those summaries are, as they don't represent to other editors how your edit improved the article (if at all) in any of those 500 edits. Please write your own summary for each edit. Mathglot (talk) 20:06, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Pattern of pointless changes to white space

Please do not make changes to articles for no other purpose than moving blanks around which have no affect on the rendered page that a reader sees. All of these edits today were white-space fiddling with no improvement or change to the page:

1. Bus Whitehead (diff) Spelling/grammar/punctuation/typographical correction
2. Chart Records (diff) Spelling/grammar/punctuation/typographical correction
3. Claud Muirhead (diff) Spelling/grammar/punctuation/typographical correction
4. East Gordon, New South Wales (diff) Spelling/grammar/punctuation/typographical correction
5. FDA recall policies (diff) Fixing style/layout errors Spelling/grammar/punctuation/typographical correction
6. Helga Zepp-LaRouche (diff) Fixing style/layout errors
7. Kourou (river) (diff) Fixing style/layout errors
8. One Night (Elvis Presley song) (diff) Fixing style/layout errors
9. Pomaria (Summer–Huggins House) (diff) Spelling/grammar/punctuation/typographical correction

I have not reverted any of these, but they never should have been made in the first place. Besides the fact that none of these changes were improvements and had misleading edit summaries, in terms of guidelines they are MOS:VAR violations. I think in general you are trying to go too fast and while you are making pointless edits like these ones or low-impact edits like your comma edits, you are missing some larger issues as you whiz by. At this edit for example:

• 10. Brynjolv Baardson (diff) Spelling/grammar/punctuation/typographical correction

you did some comma-diddling that barely mattered, but you missed the forest for the trees. In the very same sentence where you moved commas around, you missed these glaring errors (emphasis added) which actually are real grammar problems in need of attention:

• In January 1942 he volunteered to the United States Army and fought with in the jungles of Cebu Island...

Please slow down; I think you are making some careless mistakes that are well-intentioned but don't help the encyclopedia, because you don't yet have a thorough understanding of the Manual of style. You will, but it takes time.

Talking about slowing down: I was aghast at a comment you made in passing while asking a question at the Tea house, namely that you are approved for WP:AWB. I would be very concerned if you were to start making the same type of changes with bot assistance, that you are making now while editing manually. Please discuss your plans in advance and get some sort of buy-in for any bot-assisted runs before you make them. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 09:27, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

in the teahouse we were discussing what appears to be a consensus that "in regards to" is incorrect usage, and as you pointed out, only "as regards" is appropriate. Iljhgtn (talk) 12:15, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

i don't know why some people leave two spaces after a sentence. i only use one, and one would seem "correct", but i can stop making that adjustment if it bothers anyone. Iljhgtn (talk) 12:37, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

there was an old teahouse discussion where i asked about the white space things. i only do that when there is an arrow-looking-symbol after the sentence. the arrow symbol also seemed to indicate that there was an extraneous space beyond what was needed or helpful. Iljhgtn (talk) 12:39, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

i dont know if you believe it makes any difference by the way, but i mark these edits as minor when it is a minor edit. i hope it has not been too bothersome, but i am always open to improving my contributions. Iljhgtn (talk) 12:49, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

also, to be clear, we are only referring to the excessive white space between sentences correct? i just corrected one that was found between words, and i think that is still valid to correct for those when i come across that type of error? here is the example, Shipping News. Iljhgtn (talk) 13:03, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

I'll bundle some replies to various comments above in one reply:

i don't know why some people leave two spaces after a sentence

If you're curious why, see spaces after a period.

i only use one, and one would seem "correct"

This is kind of the heart of the problem, right there. Please don't make edits based on what "would seem 'correct'"; that is the root of a lot of your problematic edits. Make your edits based on what Wikipedia's policies and guidelines say, not based on your own opinion of correctness. Here is a list of them. In particular, given the type of edits you like to make, many of your edits should be based on the Wikipedia:Manual of style.

i only do that when there is an arrow-looking-symbol after the sentence.

Sorry, don't know what you mean, so cannot respond.

i just corrected one that was found between words, and i think that is still valid to correct...

Here we are back to the central problem again: you are basing your changes based on what you think is correct, and I'm trying to explain in every way I know how, to stop doing that and use the Manual of style instead. Every edit you make must be in order to improve the article in some way (no matter how small), and must be compliant with policies and guidelines and many of your edits are neither. If you keep doing this, sooner or later you are going to get blocked. As far as two spaces between words, obviously it's not necessary, and when you are making some other substantive change to the page which improves it concretely in some way—adding a link, adding content, supplying a reference—then you can clean up other things like excess spaces if you want *in the same edit*, but as space-cleanup cannot be seen by a reader viewing the page, it's not an "improvement to the article" by itself, and you shouldn't make an edit that *only* fiddles with white space.

i dont know if you believe it makes any difference by the way, but i mark these edits as minor when it is a minor edit.

Not really, no. You can read up on that at WP:MINOR.

i hope it has not been too bothersome, but i am always open to improving my contributions.

Well, the bothersome part has been in how fast you do some of these edits, based on your own sense of what's "correct". I know you are here for the right reasons, i.e., to improve the encyclopedia, and I appreciate that. But because this is an online encyclopedia and not a free forum site, we can't just write whatever we want, it has to be based on the rules established for contributing here, and I'm just trying to shift your focus from "what's correct" in your eyes, to "what the policies and guidelines support".

I highly recommend that you spend some time browsing the Manual of style, and then with each edit, find the MOS guideline entry that supports your change, and add a link to it in the edit summary to justify your edit, just like when I added a link to MOS:LQ in the summary when I reverted your edit at Westward Ho! (clipper) where you placed the comma inside the quotation marks. I hope this all makes sense, and is helpful to you. Mathglot (talk) 20:56, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

that does make sense, i'll review the MOS even more than i have already. by the way, i asked about the arrows once on the teahouse and someone responded about that. i forget now what it was called and all. are you able to sort my past edits for just teahouse questions? Iljhgtn (talk) 20:59, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks; feel free to ask questions as you go. Besides the Teahouse, there's also the Wikipedia:Help desk, and template {{Help me}}. You can try this advanced search to find you Teahouse questions. Mathglot (talk) 21:14, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

can you tell me if there what the MOS claim is for putting one space in between each word. I can't believe that even needs to be spelled out. not in between two sentences, but like this, in between two words. I find those often and correct those as well, and i really cant imagine that that is a stylistic choice even that WP:VAR would be relevant to. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:16, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

hmm, it didn't render the space in between the "like this".. let me see if it forces it now? Iljhgtn (talk) 21:17, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

no, it still is fixing it in the read version. is that the problem? that i am only seeing this in the visual editor mode? are spaces, of any number, always fixed in the read version? Iljhgtn (talk) 21:18, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

i think having more dropdown options from the menu of edit summaries would be helpful too. if you know where to request that, i can put the request in. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:26, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Responses:

can you tell me if there what the MOS claim is for putting one space in between each word.

There isn't one, because there doesn't need to be.

hmm, it didn't render the space in between the "like this"

Even though you had three spaces there (and so does the shaded quote above), neither one shows more than one space. This is just a standard feature of Html. This sentence has about fifty or a hundred spaces in it, and a whole bunch of line breaks, but you can't see any of that. That's just Html standard procedure.

no, it still is fixing it in the read version. is that the problem?

Not a problem, a feature. It's also part of why you needn't bother "fixing" excess white space, because it doesn't do anything for the reader.

i think having more dropdown options from the menu of edit summaries would be helpful too.

I don't use them, but I can see why they'd be helpful. What would help me, is being able to specify a list of my own potted edit summaries somewhere in my Preferences (see link top of this page), and then have those show up in the dropdown. Mathglot (talk) 21:49, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

that is a good suggestion too. i can see many people benefitting from that. Iljhgtn (talk) 15:24, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Overlinking

Please don't link major geographical entities like England as you did in Welcome Way: see WP:OVERLINK. Thanks. PamD 17:24, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

CS1 error on The Capitalist Manifesto: Why the Global Free Market Will Save the World

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page The Capitalist Manifesto: Why the Global Free Market Will Save the World, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 00:00, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:My Little Blue Dress book cover.jpg

The file File:My Little Blue Dress book cover.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-free book cover being used in a WP:DECORATIVE manner in Bruno Maddox#My Little Blue Dress which fails WP:NFCC#8. Non-free book cover art is generally consider OK when used for primary identification purposes at the top of or in the main infobox of a stand-alone article about the book the cover represents, but its use in other article or in other ways is generally not considered acceptable per WP:NFC#CS and WP:NFC#cite_note-3 unless the cover art itself (not the book, but the cover art) is the subject of sourced critical commentary.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:06, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

see it. i'll focus on images only for the primary infobox of books and not these sub-section portions of articles, even if they have their own infoboxes. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:12, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

"Haorder" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Haorder has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 6 § Haorder until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 04:42, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited José Meneses (basketball), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chihuahua.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

CS1 error on Institute for Justice

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Institute for Justice, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 17:27, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pappa polis book cover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Pappa polis book cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:27, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Javier milie

A tag has been placed on Javier milie 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. ~ Prodraxis (Merry Christmas!) 05:10, 18 December 2023 (UTC)