Uninspired Username

Welcome to Wikipedia

It's traditional to welcome people with gifts of virtual foods. Here's some bananas and mangoes, which are tasty but, contrary to some rumours, won't protect against COVID-19

Welcome to Wikipedia, Uninspired Username! Thank you for your very impressive first edit (first edits with formatted refs are rare!). I have tidied your paragraph slightly; we normally don't give dosage regimes on Wikipedia (not that you were expected to know that), and I've put the inter-article links in normal sentence case (they aren't case-sensitive here, though they are on Wiktionary). It's good to see more people talking COVID-19 misinformation, our articles are not keeping up withe the rumourmills. I hope you find yourself with the time and enthusiasm to edit more. Please be aware that others around here are happy to give you support as needed: the community at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine can help if you have any questions about medical-topic edits, and Wikipedia:TEAHOUSE can answer more general questions. I'd also be happy to give you any help I can whenever I am online. Again, welcome (and I like your username)! HLHJ (talk) 06:32, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

@HLHJ: Hello, and thank you for your lovely message! My first quest is to figure out how to reply to this properly. I will try out some more edits related to COVID-19 misinformation, quackery among other things travels awfully fast. Cheers! Uninspired Username (talk) 16:12, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Quest successful; you replied entirely properly. Indent, ping, signature. Perfect. I see you edited the markup directly, too. The learning curve is a bit too close to perpendicular at first, and therefore Wikipedia has frankly too many resources for newcomers. Some of them are aimed at specific groups (researchers, for instance, or medical professionals). There is a quest-type introduction in the form of an adventure game, Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure, which some people find helpful, but it uses markup, rather than the Visual Editor which you have mostly been using (both are fine). I can try to find you specific tutorials or resources, depending on what you prefer.

Perhaps the most important anti-quackery rule we have is WP:MEDRS (MEDical Reliable Source). If you see any really dodgy medical claim on Wikipedia, it probably needs to be sourced from a MEDRS, and isn't. You'll notice that the List of unproven methods against COVID-19 page has "[medical citation needed]" and "[citation needed]" tags, requesting that information be cited from these two standards of sources (there's also "[unreliable medical source?]"). These tags are appended to unsourced information that might be sourceable; if you are really sure that the information cannot be sourced, you can just delete it (or source the correct statement on the subject, if applicable). Don't feel obliged to follow all those links, they are just me trying to ensure that I'm not incomprehensible. HLHJ (talk) 18:18, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

@HLHJ: Thanks for the great advice - and the fact that there really is a Wikipedia quest is marvellous. The help pages are indeed a bit overwhelming, and I'm still a bit unsure about the etiquette involved in editing content, but it's interesting to get more deeply involved in this. Thanks again for the great introduction, and I may ping you again if I have questions. Cheers! Uninspired Username (talk) 23:43, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Uninspired Username, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Uninspired Username! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Nick Moyes (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Feedback on Lake Infoboxes

Thanks for the help with the lakes infobox backlog. Since you said you were getting started with Wikipedia and the lakes project I wanted to highlight an adjustments I made to the infobox Lacul Vrăjitoarelor where the map was placed in an image parameter. The body of water infobox suggests that maps not be placed as an image. The image in the body of the article will still be used in the previews, but leaving the image open allows for checking if photo of the lake is available. Also for accessibility it is helpful if a alt is included in the pushpin map image. Keep up the great work, I hope this constructive criticism is well received. We're really cruising through the backlog with your help! :) Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? (talk) 19:29, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh and just as a behavior, I've been skipping adding infoboxes unless there are coords as the pushpin map and value just isn't there until the lake can be located in my opinion and in the way error checking is in place. The coord missing template is tracked in the cleanup tasks as part of the lakes project. Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? (talk) 19:35, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@Wolfgang8741: Hey Wolfgang8741, thanks for the feedback, it is helpful. I'll admit helping with this backlog has been almost addicting what with the extra downtime / indoor time thanks to this whole pandemic thing! If there is any more feedback you want to pass along feel free, if I know more about the best practises for these infoboxes/lake pages I can fix up others as I come across them. I did add coordinates to a few lakes, and fixed some others that were clearly incorrect ... so far I have been making sure I can cross-reference with google maps, files on Wikimedia commons with the lake name and other websites (like GeoNames), plus the geographic info in the text (e.g. province, district, etc). Is there a process you could point me to for validating coordinates? Cheers, Uninspired Username (talk) 20:02, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@Uninspired Username: I know what you mean. I've been mostly self taught for practices with a lot of reading. Mentors are great and I'm happy to share what I know. Regards to coords I guess you saw the coord guide. There isn't a clear guide written, but probably would be a good page to be added to the lakes or Geography project which lakes acts as a subproject to see if there is something. I usually use a triangualtion and only if I'm absolutely sure of the referenced lake matches I'd add. Sometimes if the author is still active and try to ping them on the page talk you can get a confirmation by looking back, but they are not always active anymore. I kind of been trying to revamp the Lakes project to add infoboxes, ensure link to Wikidata is correct, and cleanup pages enough to explore more Wikidata integration to support the project (a whole new rabbit hole to go down). I've taken the conservative approach to only clean up the data structure of pages at the moment ie merge existing info as I learn about the lakes domain for focus on a gazetteer function and helping to maintain lake links easier. There can be many lakes that can have the same name even in the same region or where it is clearly obvious. I tend to refer to authoritative sources that have inventoried lakes and the data is open ie USGS in the USA. I've almost completed an import of the lakes in Michigan from GNIS to Wikidata to build out a demo of a few ways wikidata could help the maintenance of the lakes project. Clear_Lake_(Michigan) as and Index page, Generated lists for worklists and custom queries for largest lakes etc just playing with this now at User:Wolfgang8741/Standardizing_Lakes_Lists_Demo. Funny story is while importing the lakes for Michigan to Wikidata and then cross linking them to OpenStreetMap (which data powers Wikimedia maps which also is used for some of the pushpin maps) I identified and reported a handful of duplicate lakes at administrative boundaries which were corrected. Even coords on some of these are not perfect as the lake may have reduced in size or other event and need adjustment or the measure is off slightly. If you have specific questions ping me anytime. Would be happy to have your help on this larger demo... which the infobox backlog is the start. I was actually looking at writing up the concept soon for the project to give feedback on a phased approach to regional development and cleaning of the project Wikipedia, Wikidata, OSM. So that is something on my todo, but for now infoboxes on pages with 1. coords, 2. Location 3. type of waterbody 4. pushpin map (because it is helpful to see where a lake is located). The thing I haven't looked into is how hard it would be to improve the infobox template to allow for regional rollout as Wikidata is improved. Michigan lakes were automatically imported as lagoons and a group of lakes as a single lake etc some due data resolution of sources and some possibly due to local terms for lakes, but this is why I suggest phased approach to give systematic coverage of at least name, location, type, coord and things that don't reach notability alone, but could as a list / index. This all needs written up though to be more structured. Sorry for the braindump, but welcome to the project. Best advice, look at a few dozen of the highly assessed article infoboxes and you should get an idea, read the infobox page (it is not perfect, but it is getting better). :) Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? (talk) 20:45, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@Wolfgang8741: Lots of info for sure...it looks like there is a plan though! If I get a chance I'll take a look at these links you added here. I don't know that I understand what a "regional rollout" of the infoboxes would look like, but going through I have noticed lakes with infoboxes that are "not standard"..e.g. looks like an old template, or lots of the empty lines removed. Would these break if there is a change to the template? Some of the issues discussed here, such as confirming coordinates, I guess is limited by exposure... If this project keeps growing, more organization and standardizing, hopefully there will be more viewers or activity. If the page for a lake with not confirmed coordinates had a banner would this help the problem? Anyway, for now if I have any questions I'll ping you..... cheers. Uninspired Username (talk) 23:21, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@Uninspired Username: The regional rollout is more on the plan of enabling automatic data import from wikidata which would mean the data quality has reached a threshold the community trusts enough to display through a vetting, but as I say I have to write this up for clarity still. The older lake infobox is treated as equivalent to body of water infobox. The body of water was a broader standardization of infoboxes in Wikipedia. The missing lines sadly is a thing which makes a bit more work for those editing at source level, but other editors and tools seem to remove these from time to time. The front end visual editor doesn't even suggest all the fields as available, so the supporting tools themselves create these artifacts and the legacy templates. There also is a second infobox that is used which is the Dam infobox which is used for reservoirs which also list the dam, but the dam doesn't have its own page. This I think could be better distinguished with some coordination with the Dams project and a good next after finishing the backlog. I've skipped reservoirs for now in the backlog so this could be addressed with further harmony and consistency between the projects since the dam infobox doesn't have all the fields the body of water does for their upper and lower reservoir sections. Given Infoboxes are machine readable a future phase can automate cleanup and standardization across WikiProject Lakes tagged pages, but adding fields where there is a value available is always a good idea. I would like to make some QA checks on pages without a pushpin map and other fields on the infobox which could be automated or sped up by integrating to editing tools. The confirmed coordinate I think would be made more apparent when viewing on Wikimedia maps and could also checked with a computation if/when linked to OpenStreetMap to make our lives easier since you can see if a point is within the shape of the water and continue to monitor changes that way. Thus where found corrections can be made and would essentially address the coordinate confirmation and other maintenance tasks. Humans do the human thing ie write articles, and computers do the routine checks, but to get there we need certain elements in place. Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? (talk) 05:37, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lizard Lake (Juan de Fuca, Vancouver Island) has been accepted

Lizard Lake (Juan de Fuca, Vancouver Island), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

KylieTastic (talk) 10:22, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Upper Campbell Lake has been accepted

Upper Campbell Lake, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Sulfurboy (talk) 05:58, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:57, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Norwex (November 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Passengerpigeon was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Norwex and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Norwex, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Passengerpigeon (talk) 02:44, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Norwex

Hello, Uninspired Username. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Norwex, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:01, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Norwex

Hello, Uninspired Username. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Norwex".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:54, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Tarium Niryutait Marine Protected Area has been accepted

Tarium Niryutait Marine Protected Area, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

SportingFlyer T·C 20:58, 27 June 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) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)