Open main menu

05:47:28, 3 December 2017 review of submission by Nagur MeeravaliEdit

ArbCom 2017 election voter messageEdit

 Hello, I dream of horses. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer NewsletterEdit

Hello I dream of horses/2017, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
  • Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

Outreach and Invitations:

  • If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: {{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive

  • A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
  • Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update:

  • ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
  • The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HitPoint StudiosEdit

  You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HitPoint Studios. You were the AFC acceptor:) Winged BladesGodric 14:51, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

A message from Meher MansionEdit

B. J. Christie Kumar has been re-created and request your inputs. Meher Mansion (talk) 04:18, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

@Meher Mansion: I went ahead and nominated it for speedy deletion, because it had been previously deleted by a Articles for Deletion discussion. If it's been genuinely improved since that discussion, it's likely my nomination will be rejected. -- I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 19:26, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

My articleEdit

Actually my article is factual. I had an person to person interview with the music artist involved in the article I have written. It's okay though, you thought wrong. I guess before I resubmit my factual data you can let me know how to reference my article correctly. So it appears in the eyes of viewers or you as factual information that it is. Appreciate the feedback. Thank you! Abernstein100552 (talk) 02:35, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

@Abernstein100552: A personal interview isn't going to work. You need references to verify information and to show the person you're writing about qualifies for a Wikipedia article.  I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 02:37, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
Would a link to the bio of the music artist work? The article is about a music artist and I used most of the facts from his Facebook page. Abernstein100552 (talk) 01:06, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
@Abernstein100552: It depends. If the content is user generated (like, it's from facebook), it wouldn't necessarily help with proving notability. -- I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 03:03, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Intelligent designEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Intelligent design. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

A message from TomehrEdit

Hello,

Please review deletion for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunken_boxing.

The topic was called a hoax and claimed to include insufficient or sub-par references. The topic is real and describes a discipline practiced by many individuals, including myself. As far as references, I'm not sure what is expected from an article about a kung fu style. I did include references to 2 books, 1 of them published by University of Hawaii Press. It is also noteworthy that many other articles of this sort exist for other kung fu styles, and I believe this article to be of higher quality than many of its counterparts.

Thank you for your times and please advise.

Tomehr Ben Johanan Tomehr (talk) 08:07, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

@Tomehr: We expect an article not to get deleted via "article for deletion" nomination, and if it does, we expect people not to recreate the article without substantial improvement.
Other kung fu articles haven't been deleted. We can't delete them speedily, and they are of a quality where no one has thought to nominate for an articles for deletion. Expectations will be lower for them.
In otger words, even if I were able to review the deletion, I'd probably end up agreeing with Anthony Appleyard.  I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 16:08, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
@Anthony Appleyard: Why would you need to do that?  I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 02:11, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
@Anthony Appleyard: Did you check to see if the article was substantially different from what the deleted version was? If it was more or less the same, then consensus has already been reached, and there's no need to repeat the process. If it deviated from the deleted version enough, you would've had the right to restore it without hesitation; at worst, it would've been forgivable if the article ended up being deleted later.  I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 06:32, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
  • @Anthony Appleyard and I dream of horses: I understand the logic behind speedy deletion of articles that are similar to ones that have been deleted in the past, but the fact is that the original article has been wrongly deleted in the first place. The original article was deemed a hoax, despite links to it from other articles, parallel articles in other languages (including Chinese) and the simple fact that it is an actual martial art practiced by many people. There are sites, forums, blogs and Facebook groups dedicated to practitioners, there are martial arts schools around the world where students train etc. I added an academic reference that references to a primary source - this itself is way beyond what should be expected from this sort of topic, a fact that in itself makes this specific article more "credible" than many other kung fu style articles. I think it could be great for others to contribute to this topic and also to edit or criticize, but there is absolutely no reason to simply remove the entire topic.
@Tomehr: The fact is, Wikipedia is based on collaborative editing, a large part of which is consensus. The AfD process is part of consensus-making.
Also, it's based on reliable sources, which Wikipedia (even other language Wikipedias) and Facebook aren't. This is because, respectively, Wikipedia doesn't cite itself for accountability purposes, and user generated content is not reliable. Also, keep in mind that there are articles that fall through the cracks to various degrees, but that doesn't justify their poor quality existence.  I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 07:45, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
@I dream of horses:OK, so nothing I said justifies a Wikipedia article. Like I said, the consensus to delete the article was mistaken. If you are claiming the article is of poor quality, I do not understand the basis for this claim. Assuming this article did "fall through the cracks", and that we don't want that to happen, what should be our next step?
@Tomehr: You can put it in a userspace sandbox and see if an admin would agree it's sufficiently different from the original article to justify it being moved to mainspace. I'm not an admin, so can't see deleted content.  I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 08:51, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
@I dream of horses:Thank you, I will look into that. Who is the admin, and how can I put the article there now that it is deleted? It is important to note that the reason this deletion needs to be reverted is not that the new article is significantly different than the old one (though it is greatly improved), but that the deletion of the old article was a mistake. Is there any way to contest the consensus to delete the original article?
@Tomehr: There's no way to contest consensus, but Sandstein deleted the article originally and Anthony Appleyard was the one who speedily deleted it most recently.  I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 01:48, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

About using citations in Wiki submissions 71.71.104.97 (talk) 14:46, 21 December 2017 (UTC)Edit

Dear I dream with horses: I submitted this page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Luis_Hern%C3%A1ndez_Navarro#/editor/0 and you noted that I had too many in-line citations. I wanted to clarify that you were referring to the biographical comments at the beginning. I felt this as well, but I am lost as to what can I say without having to cite it. I have an academic background in which APA style is dictated, and every declarative statement has to be cited. For example, if I say the journalist is a social critic (because he is recognized as such and I have sources in which he is discussed as such), can I say he is a social critic without citing that? Or would it be better to say he is an author and journalist, and here is a list of his work (which I need to shorten, per your comments that the bibliography should not take up most of the article). . Thank you for your help. I respond really well to advice, so I truly look forward to any further tips and guidelines you can offer to improve the piece. BadMujer 71.71.104.97 (talk) 14:46, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

The way you suggested is one way; the other is to describe him as an author and journalist in the intro, and then create different sections, one describing his career in better detail, saying that he's a social critic there, so as to not bunch up inline citations into one section. -- I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 01:57, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you from BadMujer 71.71.104.97 (talk) 18:16, 22 December 2017 (UTC)Edit

Thank you! Helpful to know that I can create separate sections. BadMujer 71.71.104.97 (talk) 18:16, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Seasons' GreetingsEdit

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 03:45, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:International System of UnitsEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:International System of Units. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

I need help!Edit

Hi! I recently uploaded a picture of myself on wikipedia so that I could use it in an article that I'm writing. The picture is taken by a photographer but I have bought the rights and the photo, so it's mine. Now, to my question, when I go into the page where my photo is, it says on the metadata information about the photographer and also it says that he is the owner and has copyrights. How can I remove that, and If not possible, how do I remove the picture from wikipedia? I have not yet posted it on an article.

Here's the link to the website.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jan_Lexell,_Lund_University,_April_2017.jpg#metadata — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimbo.lo (talkcontribs) 20:22, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

@Nimbo.lo: If you aren't able to freely sell your photo on the T-shirt, or aren't willing to have it sold on a T-shirt, we can't really have it on Wikipedia, except under rare circumstances. Wikipedia tries to be as freely-cultured licensed, or as unlicensed, as possible. So, since you're alive and can have your picture taken, I'll be overly-cautious and tell you how to get it deleted. I'd think adding {{db-67}} will do. -- I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 01:45, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

23:03:25, 28 December 2017 review of submission by 68.102.39.189Edit


I Want the 2018 in music article to move from The draft to the main article space. 68.102.39.189 (talk) 23:03, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Right, so improve and re-submit.  I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 02:06, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

New Years new page backlog driveEdit

Hello I dream of horses/2017, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1st and run until January 29th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

  • The total number of reviews completed for the month.
  • The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.


If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here.TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Request on 01:15:09, 31 December 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Chike EboseEdit



Chike Ebose (talk) 01:15, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

@Chike Ebose: Yes? -- I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 05:47, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "I dream of horses/2017/December".