Open main menu

Contents

StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsEdit

Hello Girth Mr Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars didn’t know that The Essential Human Nature was still On Wikipedia without a review. He keep it there and he didn’t get rid of it until later. He has been telling people off on Wikipedia for no reason. If you seen his messages in my talk page. He has been telling me off for the last whole week. I’m just letting you know what’s been going on. Thanks Ben and I have been deleting bad comments from Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars on my talk page because it have hurt my feelings.

Apologies for slow responses on Counter VandalismEdit

I quickly needed to get this off my chest, I wanted to quickly apologize for not getting the next section of the course done in a timely manner, I’ve struggled with inconsistent motivation, and school work, and I will likely have even less time in the coming weeks as finals come closer. James-the-Charizard (talk) 03:25, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi James-the-Charizard - no problem, I completely understand that real life gets in the way sometimes. What do you want to do now? I'll be happy to put this on hold until your finals are over, and then we can pick it up afterwards; on the other hand, if your interest has waned and you just want to terminate the training now, that's fine too - we're all volunteers, there's no onus on you to complete the course if you are no longer interested. Just let me know what you prefer - and good luck with your finals! Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 17:21, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
@Girth Summit: I would like to keep it going at the moment, but I will pause when the studying for finals gets underway. I will keep you up to speed when that gets to be. Thanks. James-the-Charizard (talk) 17:31, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
@James-the-Charizard: Hope the course don't interfere with your study. I recommend you to resume the course after your finals (that's what I did). It will be lot quicker that way. Also you don't need to ping Girth on his talk page, talk page owners get notified by notification automatically. Masum Reza📞 12:48, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
@Masumrezarock100: My study for finals has not started yet (It won’t until the second to last week of school, which is starting from June 3rd) But I will time down Wikipedia a bit when we get to that point. I have education set first before this website. James-the-Charizard (talk) 13:00, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi James-the-Charizard - you've absolutely got your priorities right there! Whenever suits you, please read through the training page again to remind yourself where you are at, and pick up the next task. Ping me from there when you are ready for me to review your work, or if you have any questions you'd like me to look at. (Better to ask any questions about the content of the course there on the training page, so we can refer back to them later if necessary). Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 13:03, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Knights Templar in ScotlandEdit

Hi there. Someone, anonymous, has made an addition to a page I am watching (intending to update it in the future). The addition is pure speculation and no source is cited. I was going to change it back to the original (reverting?) but I am not sure if I have the authority or ability (!) to do that. The change page is at: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Knights_Templar_in_Scotland&diff=next&oldid=897681626 Your advice would be much appreciated. Ericthearcher (talk) 15:56, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ericthearcher - in a situation like that, you have two options. You can revert to the previous version, or you can add a 'citation needed' tag (you do the latter by typing {{fact}} after the unsourced assertion. In this case, I think that reverting would be fine - you should leave an edit summary along the lines of 'This is unsourced - please discuss on talk page before reinserting'. Let me know if you user reinstates it after your reversion - don't be tempted to get into an 'edit war' with them, I'll help you take the appropriate action if they're re-reverting and refusing to discuss. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 16:03, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Juan Arias (horse trainer)Edit

On subjects about which you have no knowledge it's probably a lot easier and would save everybody a lot of time if you have doubts about "notability" just to leave a note on Wikipedia:WikiProject Horse racing which is always on the article talk page. They have editors who know these things. Any horse, jockey, or trainer who wins the Kentucky Derby (the most important horse race in North America) gets a bio at Wikipedia. If they win the Preakness Stakes then they are one race away from horseracing immortality. Juan Arias is not just a horse racing legend in his native Venezuela, he is in N.A. as well. Also, the refs you installed have no titles and are in a different format? Did you want me to fix them and if so, should I change your format or am I using the wrong one? Thanks, appreciate your effort to help out. Stretchrunner (talk) 08:58, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Stretchrunner - thanks for reaching out, although I confess I've had friendlier introductions. I accept that I don't know a much about horse racing, but I do have a working understanding of notability and sourcing - when I reviewed this article, I saw only two sources, neither of which gave the subject anything better than trivial coverage - not enough to pass GNG. I did a quick check and found some sources with more significant coverage, but real life got in the way last night and I didn't have time to work them up fully, so added them to the page as bare URLs to ensure that another patroller didn't come along and nominate the article for deletion. As I tried to explain in my edit summary, I intended to work them up properly shortly - which I have started doing now. Give me a few minutes and they'll be sorted. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 09:20, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Thames British School DraftEdit

Thank you for taking the time out to review the article. I'll do my best to make the subsequent changes and resubmit it when I think I may have resolved the issues. Thanks again.

No problem Praevalebit - feel free to drop me a note if you want me to cast an eye over it before resubmitting - that might save you another long wait! Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 17:54, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
A comment on pinging: a notification is sent to a user if you enter a link to the user's page and you sign in the same edit. So when you fixed a link to User:Praevalebit above but did not add a new ~~~~ signature, then Praevalebit was not notified. --CiaPan (talk) 18:39, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi CiaPan - thanks for keeping an eye out - I actually knew that already, and even went as far as to type the word 'resign' in my edit summary, but for some reason I forgot to actually resign the post. My head must not be working properly today, I'll need to get it cleaned out... Hopefully Praevalebit will have see the reply following your ping. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 18:43, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
@Girth Summit: :) CiaPan (talk) 18:50, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

I didn't check the 'talk page' here and didn't alert you of the changes before resubmitting. It would have been good for you to cast a glance over the article (I would have fully appreciated it!). Anyway, I think I managed to make the necessary changes... Praevalebit (talk) 19:23, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Praevalebit - I took a quick look at the sources you added. I'm afraid my Polish is non-existent, so I can't really assess the Przeglad document (it's a PDF, so I can't get Chrome to translate it for me), but that might be the best source - the Kuratorium source is a simple directory listing (not significant coverage), and the 'Our Kids' site has obviously been written by the school (not independent). I'll leave it for another reviewer, hopefully with appropriate language skills, to make the assessment, but anything else you can find and add would strengthen the case. BTW, I notice that your user page indicates that you work at a school in Warsaw, but you haven't specified whether it's this school. In my decline notice, I gave you some links to WP:COI and WP:PAID, please do review these - if you have any connection to this school, especially a financial one, it's important for you to declare that if you are going to write about it. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 11:21, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks again for checking. I thought those links may work, I can remove the OurKids one as it is a listing of the school but with an opinion written by OurKids itself (and I thought that might add some form of independent aspect to the page). The Kuratorium listing is a government website that lists the existence of every school registered in Poland so I thought that might be useful as well. The newspaper article is just a small article within the middle section of the newspaper which announces that there's a new school in Piaseczno. As for the school, it is true that I work for the school (and there's no financial incentive!) so I've just gone through with the declaration process (quite interesting!). Also, I would like to mention other school wiki pages (of international schools in Poland) link to their own websites but I thought those links I added might be enough as I'm having difficulty finding any better links. Please let me know what to do with the links I've submitted (now that you know my reasoning behind them :) ) Praevalebit (talk) 11:42, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Praevalebit, sorry if I wasn't clear - I don't think you need to remove those links, just that in and of themselves they aren't the best possible sources for the reasons I mentioned. If you can find anything else that's independent of the school that would be even better, but don't feel that you need to cut them at the moment. Thanks for clarifying your connection to the school. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 12:07, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

I suppose the issue is that we're a new school and we've relied on a lot of marketing to promote us via social media... They are the only 'independent' links I could find without having to delve into online forums ;). I've also had a look at the WikiProject/Schools guidelines and I'm trying to follow them step by step. Praevalebit (talk) 12:27, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Cullen Old ChurchEdit

 On 28 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cullen Old Church, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the internal organs of Elizabeth de Burgh, wife of Robert the Bruce, were buried at Cullen Old Church? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cullen Old Church. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Cullen Old Church), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

wrong accusationEdit

it should be blindingly obvious why my edit was an improvement for neutrality and basic correctness. a foolish biased editor reverted it so i changed it back. then you issue a warning. are you dumb? use your brain, else wikipedia will be a junkyard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎86.141.32.224 (talk) 10:47, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi - you're going to need to drop that attitude if you want to edit here - calling another editor 'foolish and biased' is a personal attack (see NPA), and if you continue with your WP:BATTLEGROUND approach to content disputes your IP address will very soon be blocked from editing.
I'm afraid that it's not blindingly obvious to me that your edit was an improvement. This isn't the place to discuss that however - the section on the relevant talk page, which I created for you and directed you to, is the proper place for that. I warn you though that if you continue to make personal attacks and uncivil remarks, you will get pretty short shrift. GirthSummit (blether) 11:06, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
please note that your blind reverting of my reverting of some other fool's reverting of my good improvements to an article, was rather uncivil in itself, so you warranted my response. also note that while i am an expert on the subject matter i originally corrected, which was stupidly reverted, am not a wikipedia expert, so the proper place for me to do stuff is not jump hoops and hoops, it's to drop a message back to you in the only easy way i know, which happens to be the same gesture in how you dropped a message to me. the buck stops with you, the foolish editor, so you can clean up your own mess - i've worked enough on it which you've uncivilly blindly reverted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.32.224 (talkcontribs)
OK, first things first - there's no need to create a new section each time you post - just append comments to the existing section. You can read more about how to conduct talk page discussions at WP:THREAD.
Now, if you want to carry on any kind of discussion with me, or any other editor, you need to drop the attitude and stop insulting people. In your last post here you made a personal attack against another editor; I warned you about WP:NPA, and you've gone on to make one against me. I am not going to engage in any kind of discussion with you about content while you are insulting people. If you do that again, I will ask for administrative action to be taken against you. If you want to generate consensus for the changes you want to see made, I suggest you do it in a civil manner on the article talk page. GirthSummit (blether) 11:40, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

looks like you deleted my reply. perhaps you'd like to get back to actually undoing the problem you created instead of deflecting by talking about rudeness when in fact your initial act of blindly reverting my good work was ruder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.32.224 (talkcontribs)

Yes, your reply was removed. You may not make personal attacks against other editors. If you continue like that, I will block you from editing. SQLQuery me! 16:04, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
In reply to the IP editor - yes, I removed your post, because it included a profane personal attack. Please do not post on my talk page again. When you are unblocked, if you want to discuss the change you want to make to the article, please do it civilly, and on the relevant talk page (which is here). GirthSummit (blether) 16:48, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/NoticeboardEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

An award for you!Edit

  CVU Anti-Vandalism Award
This is for your outstanding performance in saving Wikipedia from the harmful threats of vandalism. I appreciate your efforts and hardwork. Thank you. PATH SLOPU 11:26, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
Cheers, —PaleoNeonate – 13:18, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Andy SecombeEdit

Hi, Girth,

Further to your comments - I am Andy Secombe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsebadger 1 (talkcontribs) 12:08, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Andy, thanks for reaching out. I'd be happy to discuss the changes you want to make, but first we should discuss your identity.
There are two strands to this - first, I currently don't know whether you genuinely are Andy Secombe or not - I have no reason not to believe you, but this is the internet... I'm sure you can appreciate that we can't take anonymous new accounts at face value when they claim to be the subject of an article. To address this matter, and verify that you are Andy Secombe, I recommend you confidentially contact experienced and trusted volunteers with information that verifies your identity. It's often enough, if you have an e-mail address shown on your personal website, to send an e-mail to the team from that account, rather than having to scan an official ID or similar.
Second, assuming you are Andy Secombe, that doesn't give you any particular authority over the content, the references it uses, or the maintenance tags. Actually, you're discouraged from editing it yourself except to correct simple, glaring errors, because you have a clear conflict of interest. You might be interested in reading about how we suggest dealing with articles about yourself.
So, if you have concerns about the content of the page, or you have some reliable sources that you think could be used to improve the content, please by all means put them on the talk page and I'll be happy to take a look. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 12:23, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bayer designationEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bayer designation. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - June 2019Edit

Delivered June 2019 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

18:50, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Reference format.Edit

Hi, thanks for correcting the way in which book references should appear - in this instance the article on Thomas Telford. I shall backtrack previous pages and amend them accordingly. All the best. Ericthearcher (talk) 13:11, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

No problem - it popped up on my watchlist so I just took a quick look. If you use the 'Cite' tool (just at the top of the editing window), you'll see that you can choose from a drop-down list of templates - one of the options is 'cite book', and you just have to fill in the relevant fields to have it automatically format the reference for you. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 13:57, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

PhewEdit

I have been patrolling the deletions in the queue recently. I had just commented in IRC how most people don't seem to understand BLPPROD when I get to Froy Gutierrez and see sources and the tag and then saw you placed the tag - but of course the version you tagged didn't have the sources. So long story short, keep up the good work and thanks for being an NPP :). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:08, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! In my experience so far, a BLP PROD is far more likely to result in the author finding and adding some sources, rather than the page being deleted (at least for new pages where the author is still engaged with it). Still, if the aim is to avoid us having unreferenced BLPs, then either result achieves that end. Just out of interest, how does one look at the deletion queue? Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 06:52, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Girth Summit It's an option in the feed under Type. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 13:45, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Interesting - I don't see that. When I go into 'Set Filters' in the New Page Feed, the only options it gives me are 'State', 'Predicted Class' and 'Potential Issues' - I see from the screenshot at WP:Page Curation/Help that I should also have 'Type' and 'That' options. Do you know whether there's a preferences flag I need to set, or a script I need to install or something? No biggie if you don't know, I can do some more reading around, just in case it's something simple. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 14:27, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Girth Summit Hmm. Sounds like you're at a weird resolution and need to scroll down? This should be the default setting for the feed and I see it even when in incognito mode (which might be worth trying to see if it's something with your scripts/settings or a browser/computer issue). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 14:54, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure it's not about scrolling down - I can see the green 'Set Filters' button at the bottom of the pop-up, and if I remember correctly I see the same thing on both my home and work PC, using either Google Chrome and Windows Edge. I'll play around with it a bit more and see if I can figure out what's happening, otherwise I might leave a note on NPP/Discussion to see if anyone else has had this. CheersGirthSummit (blether) 15:02, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
@Barkeep49:OK - what did you do? It just magically fixed itself - I changed nothing! I've never seen those options in all the time I've been using the feed, and suddenly they appear when I mention them to you - are you Gandalf? GirthSummit (blether) 15:46, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
I will neither confirm nor deny :). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:49, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Just checked on my home PC - I'm seeing all the options here, on Windows Edge (earlier I was on my work PC, using Chrome). So whatever spell you cast, it was pretty thorough. :) GirthSummit (blether) 16:55, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
When you're good, you're good. Glad you're all set for the future :). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:56, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Barkeep49 (talk · contribs)In all seriousness, did you actually do anything, or are you aware of any generic interface changes that happened yesterday? The page feed options are displaying properly for me now, but since last night I've noticed something odd has happened to the drop-down menu in Twinkle where you select the type of talk page warning to issue. I used to see the first dozen or so options when I opened the menu, now I just see the first five and have to scroll down - each option has got wider than it used to be. Again, this is happening on both PCs, and on both browsers - any ideas? GirthSummit (blether) 14:32, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Girth Summit, In all seriousness I did not do anything. There are regular things happening with NPP development at the moment but nothing that was committed which should have made any difference here. There was Twinkle development yesterday. Amory could have anything have changed for Girth here? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 14:48, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, that was a change to Twinkle's warning system. Some discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Twinkle#User_warning_dialog_dropdown_selector, but you shouldn't need to scroll or use the mouse anymore; simply typing something related to what you want should pull it up. ~ Amory (utc) 14:52, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks both. Can't say I'm a fan of the Twinkle change - I'm having to search for an option that, maybe 7 times out of 10, was previously displyed by default. I don't mind the addition of a search window, but having it at the cost of obscuring the thing I actually wanted doesn't seem ideal. I'll add my tuppence worth to the discussion you linked to anyway. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 15:39, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Internet censorship in ChinaEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Internet censorship in China. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

How to prevent my article from being removed by another user without any reasons?Edit

-- Nafiszami (talk) 10:21, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Nafiszami, thanks for reaching out. I'm not sure which article you've been having difficulties with - have you created an article which got deleted, or do you mean that your additions to a particular article are being removed?
In general terms, any material that you add to an article ought to be OK provided that it is reliable sources, and you are not giving the issue too much weight (so for example writing large amounts of text about a minor issue). If there is disagreement about whether something you've added belongs in an article, you should discuss it on the talk page of that particular article - if you are having issues with this, I'd be happy to take a look and offer an opinion if you let me know which article it is.
There are a number of reasons why an article might have been deleted - the most common one is that the subject isn't demonstrably notable. There are lots of guidelines around this, but the most basic on is WP:GNG - a subject must have been given significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent, secondary sources in order for us to have an article about it. If you've written an article about a subject that doesn't have enough sources, it will likely be deleted as non-notable. If you have questions about this, you should discuss it with the administrator who deleted the page - they should be able to explain their reasoning to you.
I hope this is helpful - you could take a look at WP:Tutorial or WP:Adventure to find out more about editing in general. Let me know if there's anything you want me to take a look at. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 10:40, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

York Medical SocietyEdit

Hi...thanks for your help. I can't think what else to do so will leave for now and add whenever any further information comes along. Whispyhistory (talk) 08:51, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Whispyhistory - yeah, it's looking pretty good I think. I just had another look, and didn't like having a redlink in the lead, so I've retargeted the 'medical society' link to Learned society - that can be undone if anyone gets around to writing an article about Medical Societies in general (a project for another day, perhaps?!). Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 09:21, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

halpEdit

what did i do to that page i forget i know you delted it what exactly did i do to it? it was a while ago plz refresh me B — Preceding unsigned comment added by AntiVaxSoccerMom (talkcontribs) 13:57, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi AntiVaxSoccerMom - as you say, it was a while ago, I don't recall the specifics. I didn't delete the page, I nominated it for deletion. It was reviewed by an administrator, who agreed with my assessment and deleted the page, so I am no longer able to view it. It was deleted as a 'G10', which means that it was classified as an attack page - it presumably attacked an identifiable individual. WP:UP gives information about what is, and is not, allowed on talk pages - basically, your talk page should be about yourself and your activities on Wikipedia, not to criticise other people. I hope that's helpful, regards GirthSummit (blether) 14:03, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

User talk:SHAILYYAEdit

Not sure why you templated me about speedy deletion of User talk:SHAILYYA. I certainly didn't create it. I nominated the user's sandbox for deletion here which may have made me the first editor to contribute to the talk page. Perhaps a little caution might have been better I shall now delete the template message unless it has some deeper hidden meaning that has been lost on me. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   15:54, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Velella - apologies, I didn't realise I'd done that. I nominated the page for speedy delete because they'd put a load of promotional guff on the page - the template was issued automatically when I nominated it, I clearly should have unchecked the 'Notify author' option however, since you created the page. No offense meant, please do go ahead and delete the irrelevant template. Cheers. GirthSummit (blether) 17:06, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, just to add having reread your post - if you are the first person to comment on a talk page, you are logged as having created the page - hence why you received the notification rather than them. Hope that makes sense, apologies again for the distraction. GirthSummit (blether) 17:08, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:BrexitEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Brexit. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

How can I put information on my User page?Edit

Dear Girth Summit, thank you for your offer to help me out as a Wikipedia newby. I have three questions that you may be able to answer.
1. What is a "talk page"? Is it synonymous with "user page" or is it a different entity?
2. How can I write something about myself on my user page? I thought I was doing that but evidently I was writing an "article". I tried again but now it says: "Anthony Bradbury talk contribs deleted page User:Mkatan (U5: Misuse of Wikipedia as a web host) (thank)". I entered a link to my conflicts of interest on what I thought was my user page (it was headed by a tab entitled "user page" and a heading User:Mkatan). Is it illegal to report your conflicts of interest on Wikipedia?
3. Is this the correct route for asking you questions?
Mkatan (talk) 20:51, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Mkatan, thanks for reaching out, and welcome to Wikipedia! Briefly...
1 - So, you have your own personal talk page, which you can access right at the top of the page, towards the right, where it says 'Talk'. Individual articles also have their own talk pages, which you get to by clicking on the 'Talk' tab next to the 'Article' tab, near the Wikipedia logo towards the left of the page. User talk pages are mostly used for chatting about editing and asking for help (like we're doing now!); article talk pages are for discussing changes to the specific article they're attached to.
2 - Right at the top of the page, roughly in the middle, you should have a link to your own user page (it will say 'Mkatan'). Go there, and hit edit, and you can edit it. The guidelines for what you can, and can not, have on there are here. In short, you can have a bit of information about yourself, and say what sort of areas you want to edit in, but it should be about your activities here; it shouldn't be a CV, or appear to be promoting yourself. The page I asked to be deleted wasn't your user page, you managed to create an actual article about yourself - I realise you didn't mean to do that, no harm done, but please don't be offended that I asked for it to be removed.
3 - Yes! You can also ask for help here, where lots of editors will be able to see your questions and offer assistance.
Finally - if you want to learn more about editing, you could take a look at the TUTORIAL, or the ADVENTURE, which is more of a game that takes you through the process.
Feel free to pop back here if you have any more questions. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 21:01, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Don't edit my talk pageEdit

Do not edit my talk page like you have done here [1]. Under no circumstances are you allowed to take this kind of action.Sourcerery (talk) 18:05, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

I'm not looking for any kind of conflict with you Sourcerery, I thought I was doing you a favour. Another user made a simple mistake (he inserted a message to you in the wrong section), he fixed it himself (by removing it from the wrong section, and adding it to the correct section), and your revert reinstated it - I'd assumed you'd done that by accident, without noticing that he'd reinserted his message in the right place. Now I'm wondering whether it wasn't an accident - did you intentionally reinstate another user's mistake after they'd fixed it? GirthSummit (blether) 06:31, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
His edit summery implied he was trying to make some point, yes.Slatersteven (talk) 08:11, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:5GEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:5G. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Original Barnstar
Hey, Girth, thanks for helping us out on the Knights of St. John International Page-- it's a work-in-progress for us, and your assistance helped out a lot, thank you! DHalleaux (talk) 13:01, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:William HapperEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:William Happer. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

New message from Winged Blades of GodricEdit

Hello, Girth Summit. You have new messages at Winged Blades of Godric's talk page.
Message added 13:23, 18 June 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WBGconverse 13:23, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:PolyphenolEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Polyphenol. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

I'm new and very confused, could you please help me?Edit

Dear Girth,

You just edited a page a created, René Barbera (my first!) and deleted most of the content. You actually left a lot of valuable feedback, so I'm grateful to you already!

I was wondering if you could give me a few more pointers. Barbera is a client, and my job is usually to update his website, so my main source of information is his official bio, handed to us by his management. Should I source every single role debut with the venues' websites? Mainly, how do I make sure the stuff I write stays on the page and doesn't get deleted?

Thank you so much!!

Lilith89ibz (talk) 04:03, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Lilith89ibz - thanks for reaching out here, and for explaining your situation with regard to Barbera. I'll be happy to help you get started.
First off, I removed most of the material for two reasons. First, some of it was a copyright violation of Barbera's website - you cannot copy and paste from websites. Please take a look at WP:COPYVIO for more of this.
The bulk of the material I removed wasn't copyvio, but it was unsourced - see WP:V and WP:RS. We need reliable, secondary independent sources - not his own website - to support content.
Now, there's a couple of other things I'm going to ask that you read - WP:COI and WP:PAID. If the subject is your client, you must not edit the article directly. You can request changes on the article talk page, and I'd be happy for you to ping me and ask me to take a look at any edits you want to make - but your conflict of interest means that you shouldn't change the article yourself. (Also, for future reference, you shouldn't publish articles yourself about your clients - you should go through the WP:AfC system).
I'm going to put a template on your userpage with more information about COI - please don't take this as hostile, I just want to make sure you have all the information. Please let me know if you have any questions about this, and if there are any changes you'd like me to consider for the article. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 06:38, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Dear Girth,

Oh, don't worry, I know you're trying to help!

If copyright was the issue, I could donate the bio to Wikipedia since we own the rights, but it seems the conflict of interest is the bigger problem. To be clear, my job is not to make him look good, just for him to have a Wikipedia page. I'm perfectly happy with it as it is, stating his debuts and so on as facts and that's it. I've added citations for everything from the venues websites. Could you please review it and see if it's alright? I would really appreciate it if the banner at the top was removed, if you find no issues with it. As I mentioned, this is the first time I make a Wiki page for anybody, so it's not something I do at all, but I'll make sure I do it properly if there's a next time. Thank you so much for your help!

Lilith89ibz (talk) 01:19, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Lilith89ibz - before we discuss any further changes to the article (such as the removal of the banner), please confirm that you have read WP:COI and WP:PAID, and taken the steps described there towards declaration of your connection to the subject. Thanks GirthSummit (blether) 12:11, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the reviewEdit

Just thanking you for your rapid review of my presently rather brief article on Marian Henderson. It's appreciated! Cheers - Tony Tony 1212 (talk) 19:02, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Cragend Silo and WeighbridgeEdit

Dear Girth Thank you fro the entries so far. I have photos that are better than that but we are insanely busy at moment so I may try and do that later when the work is complete. I am still so unclear how to use wiki so we really appreocate your input. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lou Renwick (talkcontribs) 12:41, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Lou, good to hear from you. Good to know you have some better pictures available - let me know if you need a hand uploading them. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 13:01, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Girth Summit".