User talk:78.26/archive2017-1

Trump-Mexico

Hi The Article subject Trump-Mexico Deal is an important matter, this "deal" with Mexico, started since the Trump (the person) announced he was running for President. This is an important thing since this relation now will decide the future of millions, Wikipedia does not have this subject. It will need much contribution since thing will happen until it is settle in to what way to go. Everything in it is a compilation of what has being said by experts, the exact words said by experts was used and can be confirmed by reading in the links. What you decide is fine, if it is to delete it, or keep contributing to make it better. Thank you,NORMAN PRINCE (talk) 06:36, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NORMAN PRINCE I'm sorry I was not able to respond to this in a timely manner. However, it looks as if you have received plenty of good input regarding the suitability of this topic, and what changes can be made to it. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:09, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, 78.26!

Happy New Year!

78.26,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 12:40, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year 78.26!

Happy New Year!

78.26,
Have a prosperous, productive and wonderful New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

--Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 20:30, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, 78.26!

Happy New Year!

78.26,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Donner60 (talk) 04:36, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year, 78.26!

Happy New Year!

78.26,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Donner60 (talk) 06:35, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Eden Mordchaev/sandbox

A tag has been placed on User:Eden Mordchaev/sandbox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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 removed 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:27, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request to review a page

Hi,im Andy1848 and I created an article called Bismark boachie(dj premier). I will like you to please review the page... Thanks Andy1848 (talk) 19:05, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Andy1848 I've gone over the page. It was already reviewed (which has a specific meaning within Wikipedia), but I removed some promotional language, and made several grammatical corrections. The subject appears to be notable. I hope that is helpful. Let me know if you were looking for a different type of assistance. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:20, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

78.26 thanks for the help, I will also like you to do the same for another article I created called Ella Mensah. Andy1848 (talk) 05:48, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I looked through this also. There weren't nearly as many obvious grammatical issues with this article. Again, I'd vouch for the notability of the topic, but I removed several of the sources as entirely inappropriate for verifying factual information. I'd prefer you find a better source for #7, as blogspot, as a blog, is not generally considered a reliable source. (Anybody can write anything, without any fact-checking.) I would highly recommend you read Wikipedia:Reliable Sources. Because of your familiarity with the topics and cultural landscape, you'll probably be better at finding reliable sources, once you learn to identify them, than I could be. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:08, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A question about protocol regarding a WP article

Today I read the RCA Thesaurus article, and I found that it totally missed the point of what RCA's Thesaurus operation was. You probably already know this, but Thesaurus was a branch of RCA that provided syndicated programming for radio stations via transcriptions. (You can see a paragraph about Thesaurus in the Transcriptions section of the "Electrical transcription" article.) The article (although it uses the words "transcriptions" and "broadcast" once each, gives the impression that Thesaurus was a retail record label like Decca or Capitol.

If I want to create an article about what Thesaurus really was, how should I go about it? Should I keep what is in the existing article and add correct information (well-cited, of course)? Would it be possible to create a new article to replace the existing one? What are your thoughts? Eddie Blick (talk) 04:01, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I'm surprised on two fronts. First, I didn't know that article existed, and second, in 40 years of collecting, I have NEVER run across a 45rpm Thesaurus disc. (I have many 16" discs I can get a photo of, if you want.)

Regarding the article, I'd pretty much start over. I thought you could incorporate what little is there into the article you would re-write, but so much of it is wrong that I'd pretty much dump everything except that Selvin was musical director for a time. It also makes it seem like the recordings were only broadcast over NBC, which of course is bunk. Although I hate to remove the information (being a discographer), the recordings listed aren't notable, and aren't particularly pertinent to the topic. I'd blow it up and start from scratch. I'd keep the label image as a "late" example, that's pretty much it. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:42, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I appreciate your response. Since you feel as I do, I hope to start work on a new "NBC Thesaurus" article soon. A photo would be good, if you don't mind providing one. At the moment I'm working on an article about Ziv Corporation, which is mentioned only in four paragraphs in Frederick Ziv and in the short Ziv Television Programs. Both overlook the company's radio syndication business, which laid the foundation for its success in TV. If you want to see my work-in-progress, it's at User:Teblick/Ziv Company.

Speaking of Ziv, that brings up a question about the correct spelling of his first name. Books and magazine articles about him and/or about the company seem to split about 50/50 between "Frederick" and "Frederic". I am inclined to go with the latter, which is the spelling used in his obituary in the Cincinnati Enquirer. Cincinnati was where he was from and where his business had headquarters. He isn't listed in my copy of the 1,800-page Almanac of Famous People. What are your thoughts? Should I include some note of explanation, whichever spelling I end up using? Eddie Blick (talk) 16:36, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Teblick, I'm not sure what the correct call is on this. Since it's split 50/50, WP:COMMONNAME doesn't apply. In that case, I think I'd go with his birth name, but state in the lede "also given as Frederick Ziv". I don't think that would require further explanation. There's probably no right or wrong way to do it, though. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:24, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your wording sounds good. I have added that. Thanks! Eddie Blick (talk) 21:31, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Ziv Company

Thanks for spotting the error in terminology about the type of disc. I have deleted "acetate"; I think "programs recorded on discs ..." will suffice, without specifying what material was used. I appreciate your help. Eddie Blick (talk) 20:46, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Teblick That's probably the best approach. "Acetate" has been used incorrectly for so long, it may at some point be defined in the dictionary as a lacquer-coated aluminum (sometimes steel, sometimes glass) recording disc. Until that time, I try to correct the terminology. If you're interested, an acetate disc is lightweight, flexible, is prone to warping and premature wear, and gives off a slight smell of vinegar, even after 80 years. They were used in the 1930s, but I don't know any examples that were made after vinyl was introduced. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:20, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know much about older materials used for recording discs, so I appreciate the insight. And I appreciate your holding to the established definition in a time when people tend to ignore distinctions more and more. Eddie Blick (talk) 21:36, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Let's reduce the environmental impact of the Wikimedia movement!

Hi 78.26, please allow me to get in touch with you because you have stated sympathy with environmental causes on your user page. I would like to invite you to check out the Environmental impact project page on Meta, where I am trying to create some momentum to reduce the environmental impact of the Wikimedia movement. My first goal is to have all the Wikimedia servers run on renewable energy. Maybe you could show your support for this project as well by adding your signature? Thank you, --Gnom (talk) 19:23, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Yasg!

Yasg! shouldn't be able to edit their own talk page!!!
178.42.217.61 (talk) 23:19, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not surprised at results. They were given enough rope, they used it. They'll create more sockpuppets, and think they're clever. Yawn. I wish you happy and productive editing, 178.42.217.61! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 04:14, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:24:40, 23 January 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by JennenySivarajah

JennenySivarajah (talk · contribs)
- Draft:T.Thuvarakan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, how can I improve this page so that it can get published can you give me examples please.

JennenySivarajah (talk) 12:24, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

12:26:29, 23 January 2017 review of submission by JennenySivarajah

JennenySivarajah (talk · contribs)
- Draft:T.Thuvarakan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi I appreciate you reviewing the article I created but I am not sure on how to improve it so that it can be accepted.Please could you give me more help support and examples.

JennenySivarajah It is exactly as I said at my review. You did not write an encyclopedia article, you wrote an article to promote the topic. For instance, phrases such as "his talent in 11 musical instruments is amazingly demonstrated" does not belong in an encyclopedia. This is unadulterated praise. Please read Wikipedia:Neutral Point of View, one of the core pillars of Wikipedia. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:30, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism

Hi, I noticed you reverted an edit from user:2405:204:5007:f975::598:60b0. They have been vandalising for a bit today. Is it possible to either ban them or put a 24 hour lock on the main article they have been editing? I'm not too sure how such things are handled so apologies if this is not the right process. Cheers. Hollth (talk) 08:58, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hollth, I think the page you want is WP:AIV. I'm sorry, I went offline just before you sent your message, so it is stale now, they quit vandalizing. Thanks for your edits, and your vigilance! All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:43, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some advice?

Hi there, 78.26. This might be a little out of the blue, but you're one of the few editors I'm acquainted with who has any substantial experience with articles related to music. I've been working on this draft, and since the source material is quite complex and detailed, I've been finding organizing it rather tricky. I was wondering if you, or anybody you are acquainted with, would care to take a look at it at some point. Cheers, Vanamonde (talk) 15:52, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's an interesting article, and well-organized as far as I'm concerned. I'm looking over it, and may have a few tweaks, but I'd love to see this featured on the main page as a "Do You Know....?" 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:07, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly hope to get it to DYK, and eventually to GA as well, as it's certainly long enough. Thanks for looking it over, and I'd love to hear your input, whether small tweaks or otherwise. Cheers, Vanamonde (talk) 16:09, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vanamonde93, I have 2 main suggestions at this point. First, the article needs a lede. Given the length of the article it should be a full paragraph of at least 6 sentences. The other is that the first paragraph relies completely on one source (Vershbow), which may engender charges of WP:UNDUE since it seems to present material from a single perspective. No reasonable person would find apartheid as a fair and just policy but, well, Wikipedia. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:17, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it is unclear how "Prominent Examples" are organized. Could they be alphabetized by song title, by artist, or chronologically? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:21, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The point about Vershbow is a good one, and I will try to find supporting sources; shouldn't be too hard, but finding brief accounts is surprisingly tricky. The lead is missing because I always write it last and I'm still working on the body: likewise the examples section, which is just a junkyard at this point. The things that are giving me trouble are how to divide information between the longer history-ish section, and the censorship and lyrics sections; or whether those are even sensible divisions to make. Cheers, Vanamonde (talk) 16:42, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vanamonde93 When it comes to layout, you've hit me in a personal weak area. Everything makes sense/flows logically to me, except the "Censorship" section. This seems to be completely about censorship within South Africa proper. Should this therefore be moved within the "South African music" section, as a subsection? It could follow the 1980s section. Alternatively, you could find additional material on how many US radio stations refused to play "Sun City". Voluntary censorship? With an international perspective, it wold make sense for "Censorship" to stand on its own. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:35, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, was there any "pro-apartheid" music, sponsored by the South African government, or otherwise produced? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:22, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ah okay, yes, that's a good thought. I'll look for more information on censorship outside SA; otherwise, integration might work...let's see. There's one instance of the government sponsoring a song that I've mentioned, but otherwise very little. This might be because the scholarly work has focused on protest music, which would necessarily ignore pro-government stuff; but I suspect that the fairly harsh restrictions placed on artistic expression meant that very few artists actually supported the government in any case. Cheers, Vanamonde (talk) 04:24, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you 78.26

Thank you for your warm welcome נתן קלמן (talk) 07:19, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're more than welcome! Let me know if I can be of assistance. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:39, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Dobos torte for you!

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.

To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:52, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the thanks

Hello 78.26, I dream of horses has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

You're more than welcome. I think it is important to welcome new users, but it is also true that some of our long-term, most active Wikipedians are grossly under-appreciated. Happy editing! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 12:51, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Leslie Thrasher

On 23 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Leslie Thrasher, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Leslie Thrasher, the creator of the fictional character Lil, was a realist? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Leslie Thrasher. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Leslie Thrasher), 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.

Mifter (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2017 WikiCup newsletter

And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. It would have been 5 points, but when a late entrant was permitted to join the contest in February, a promise was made that his inclusion would not result in the exclusion of any other competitor. To achieve this, the six entrants that had the lowest positive score of 4 points have been added to the 64 people who otherwise would have qualified. As a result, some of the groups have nine contestants rather than eight. Our top four scorers in round 1 were:

Cas Liber, last year's winner, led the field with two featured articles on birds and a total score of 674.
Iry-Hor, a WikiCup newcomer, came next with a featured article, a good article and a tally of 282 bonus points for a score of 517. All these points came from the article Nyuserre Ini, an Ancient Egyptian pharaoh,
1989, another WikiCup newcomer, was in joint third place at 240. 1989 has claimed points for two featured lists and one good article relating to anime and comedy series, all of which were awarded bonus points.
Peacemaker67 shared third place with five good articles and thirteen good article reviews, mostly on naval vessels. He is also new to the competition.

The largest number of DYKs have been submitted by Vivvt and The C of E, who each claimed for seven, and MBlaze Lightning achieved eight articles at ITN. Carbrera and Peacemaker67 each claimed for five GAs and Krishna Chaitanya Velaga was well out in front for GARs, having reviewed 32. No featured pictures, featured topics or good topics yet, but we have achieved three featured articles and a splendid total of fifty good articles.

So, on to the second round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Need Help!!

Hi, I will like you to please help in reviewing a page I created called Rev Erskine.. ThanksEddypep (talk) 13:19, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Electric Football

I am new to Wikipedia and did not realize all the rules that apply to editing. I am the founder (2007) and president of the non-profit 501c7 MFCA (Miniature Football Coaches Association) which is a forum and site made up of members dedicated to the game and hobby of electric football. We are a fan/user group and the the foremost authorities on the game of Electric Football and host league and tournament events around the country culminating in a national championship.

I attempted to edit the very outdated and incorrect Electric Football page with an article written by our MFCA historian, Ray Fanara, which you did not accept. I now understand your reasoning. Is there a way to have the same article, after rewrite, reviewed for acceptance before placing it? Also, we desperately want to replace the sad photo of the father and son looking disgusted and uninterested represented in the main photo. It is a very misrepresentative photo of what the game is. I attempted to replace it but it was also rejected and I do not know why. I just want to help make things better on the page and learn the proper way to go about making changes. If youcan answer directly or with links to the answers I seek that would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your time. ElectricFootball (talk) 21:52, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ElectricFootball. I think your ideas have a lot of merit. First, make sure that any text you send is not a copyright violation of your own organization's website. (see WP:COPYVIO, I haven't seen you've run afoul of this, but I wanted to warn you. Yes, anyone can edit Wikipedia, but that doesn't mean it is easy, there are a lot of policies and rules, as you found out!) Regarding the image, I don't see in your contribution history where you tried to upload a new photo. Again, be aware of copyright issues, what is the source of the photo you wish to use? All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 22:12, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Miksi hyökkäät minua vastaan?

Arvoisa 78.26,

Muokkasin näyttelijä Harold Lloydia koskevaa englanninkielisen Wikipedian artikkelia johon täydensin mielestäni täysin relevantteja faktoja tänän näyttelijän elämästä. Kirjoitin, että hän on syntynyt Stoke-on-Trentissä, Yhdistyneessä Kuningaskunnassa ja että hänellä on hollanninjuutalaista, skottilaista ja walesilaista sukutaustaa. Sinun mielestäsi nämä esittämäni väitteet ovat vääriä. Se on sinun mielipiteesi. Minä en ota kantaa juri esittämieni tietojen todenperäisyyteen ja oikeellisuuteen mutta mielipiteeni on, että näillä tiedoilla on täysi oikeus olla Wikipediassa. Mielestäni sinä olet käyttänyt hyvin ikävällä ja tökeröllä tavalla väärin Wikipedian vapaata luonnetta poistamalla kirjoittamani tiedot sivulta. Vaikka ne eivät olisi oikein, onko se peruste kieltää niiden olemassaolo? Haluaisin kuulla mielipiteesi tästä asiasta! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.76.164.54 (talk) 20:21, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Translation of above from Google Translate: English-language Wikipedia article on edited actor Harold Lloyd which I think is totally relevant facts about the actor's life today we supplemented. I wrote that he was born in Stoke-on-Trent, United Kingdom and that he is a Dutch Jew, Scottish and Welsh family background. You think those of my allegations are false. That's your opinion. I did not take a position on juris plans submitted by the veracity and accuracy of the information, but my opinion is that such information is fully entitled to be on Wikipedia. I think you've used a very rude and sloppy manner not free nature of Wikipedia by removing information you enter here. While they may not be right if it is established deny their existence? I would like to hear your opinion on this issue!

Please see our venerability policy. Just because you have an opinion as to where someone is born, or what their ancestry is, does not mean it belongs on Wikipedia. In fact, such made-up "information" is explicitly disallowed here. If you have a reliable source that supports your claims, then by all means please add it back in, but please use citations. I recommend referencing for beginners if you need assistance. Considering I used standard language approved by the community, I'm rather curious as to why you think I was "rude and sloppy". 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:28, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dont trust Google Translate, my friend. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.76.164.54 (talk) 20:58, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Then you'll have to communicate in English. I understand that Google Translate is imprecise, but this is English Wikipedia, and I'm afraid I don't know Finnish, at all. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:08, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why should I? in Finland we have to study English but why you don't have to study some foreign language? That's unfair. Joten tämän yhdysvaltalaismielisyyden sijaan voisimmekin keskittyä olennaiseen, eli ilmaisunvapauteen jota olet minulta riistämässä. Minä en siitä luovu! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.76.165.240 (talk) 14:56, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Google translation of above: So instead of this yhdysvaltalaismielisyyden we could concentrate on the essentials, that is, freedom of expression which you have deprived me. I will not surrender!

Then edit Finnish Wikipedia, not English. No one has a "right" to edit here while ignoring the Wikipedia pillars and policies. At this point I consider you to be trolling, and any further action along these lines will result in a block. I have sent a plethora of these policies in order to help you. I wish you the best, but I will not condone disruptive editing. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:11, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you are right. This is trolling. I'm sorry and I wont disturb you anymore.

-Best wishes from the Trolling team of Finnish Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.76.165.240 (talk) 16:15, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hi, I asked you to help out with my pages I created but haven't heard from you since... Can you look at them for me(rev erskine, Joel Orleans anponsah and Abbey music Records). Eddypep (talk) 10:53, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stellar

		The Music Barnstar
		For writing up Edison Bell from scratch after the missing article was pointed out. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 08:42, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SMcCandlish: Many thanks, that's really cool! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:55, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Edison Bell

On 14 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Edison Bell, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the phonograph and gramophone company Edison Bell was required to use Edison's name? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Edison Bell. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Edison Bell), 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.

Mifter (talk) 12:02, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Revision deletion request

Could you delete the revisions by 199.164.68.202 on Galapagos hawk? They are all quite recent and I feel they fall under criteria #2 of material that is grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive. Thanks. Tompop888^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:06, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done Also copyright violations. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:10, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Got another one that I'm pretty sure is a copyright violation: (diff)

Also, is there a Wikipedia page where you can just report revisions to be deleted or do you have to always report them to an admin? Again, thanks. Tompop888^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:35, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Tompop888: Done There's no central page for revdelete requests, in general its best to ask individual admins where there are privacy concerns, or for general disruptive material (see: WP:BEANS), but for copyvio material, you could go to WP:AN. Hope that helps. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 19:22, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

World556 discussions

Suggestion

Hiii 78.26 Sir can you help me in creating my first article. Thanks ((World556 (☎) 02:47, 15 March 2017 (UTC))[reply]

I'll do my best to help you. What is the topic? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:52, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Topic

Sir when I write a article about any objects then my article is delete but when anyone else write same articles and same line,then why his article is not delete? Help me plz ((World556 (☎) 02:56, 15 March 2017 (UTC))[reply]

I want to help you, but you need to give me more specifics. Can you give me an example? The best I can do at this point is tell you that your topics must meet notability guidelines, and that means your topics must have references to reliable sources. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:58, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More Reasons & Examples

When I am write about Baalveer then my article is delete. And when another user wrote about Baalveer then the article was not delete. Why? ((World556 (☎) 03:20, 15 March 2017 (UTC))[reply]

If you created this previously, I don't know which other account you were using. The first time it was created, it was nothing more than the text "Baal Veer" which gives the reader no idea what the topic is about, and it was rightly deleted as nonsense. The second time it was deleted, it was a copyright violation. You are not allowed to copy text, or wording, or images, or anything else that is under copyright. It was again correctly deleted. The third time the article was created, it was again a copyright violation, this time against a different source. It was again created a third time, but it was yet again copied from another website. You have to use your own words, you may not steal words from other websites, books, recordings, etc. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:27, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Saying

Sir I am write in my words but then the article was delete. And I am not use any other accounts in previously. Can you example a article ,who created by you in your words when you start your edit in wikipedia like your first article. ((World556 (☎) 03:36, 15 March 2017 (UTC))[reply]

All the articles I have created are listed here, on my user page. Next to "Articles Created" click on "Show" and a drop-down list will appear. I am currently working on draft:Josie Sadler, but it is not ready for mainspace. I would suggest if you want to start an article, you create it in the draft space. If it isn't a copyright violation, or a biographies of living persons violation, or a blatant advertisement, you will be allowed to work on it without worry that it will be deleted. I am going offline for awhile, I will be back in 10 hours or so. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:39, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You Sir and can I ask my others questions after your rest.((World556 (☎) 03:42, 15 March 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Of course. You can ask them at any time, and I will answer them when I can. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:47, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sir last question of this time. Sir can I am create a draft and draft will be deleted then my words are coping and if my draft is not delete in while time then I create a article in mainspace? ((World556 (☎) 03:54, 15 March 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Sorry

Sorry dear sir for edit your article in wrong language this is my error. Please

Sorry sir! ((World556 (☎) 13:31, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking at the page you created. One of the problems is that your English grammar often has errors that make your intended meaning difficult to understand. I would strongly suggest you not make "grammatical corrections" to articles. I will look at your page more in-depth later. However, I will comment on a few things I find confusing. What does "most popular President" mean? Is there more than one President of the organization? I don't see a source that says he is the most popular. Be careful of WP:WEASEL. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:48, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK,I remove some of errors who nominate article for WEASEL. And most popular means he is most popular in his community for his proudly works and struggles. ((World556 (☎) 14:04, 15 March 2017 (UTC))[reply]

I think we may have a grammatical error here. When you say "most popular", it means that within the whole community, there is nobody who is liked better than himself. The statement you wrote violates WP:NPOV, as it praises the subject, rather than discusses the subject in a neutral manner. If you can find a source, a better way to say it might be "He has gained wide support in his community, as he is perceived to be a hard-working representative for the community's interests." This would still need a source. I know Wikipedia can be a difficult place, and I hope I am encouraging you rather than discouraging you, because Wikipedia really needs more editors who understand topics pertinent to the Indian sub-continent. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:13, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, now see My page and talk to me what is all the problems in this, then I edit it better. Please. ((World556 (☎) 14:19, 15 March 2017 (UTC))[reply]

I will. Patience, please, it takes time. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:25, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Let's deal with things one at a time. When you say " Royal family of Jaipur's Kuchwah", what is a Kuchwah? There's no Wikipedia article on this term, and I think most Wikipedia readers who are not from India will be confused by this term.

Thank You

Thank You sir for guide me as my Parents. Now see this. I have correct grammar's errors any confused word Kachwaha. ((World556 (☎) 01:51, 16 March 2017 (UTC))[reply]

@World556: Excellent! That is so much easier to understand. Now let's take a look at the sentence "He is the very proud man for Rajputs." What is meant by that? Why is it important to an encyclopedic understanding of the topic? Do you mean Rajputs are proud of him? How would a reader be able to independently verify that outside of wikipedia? Or do you mean he is proud of his Rajput heritage? If so, why is that important? Has it greatly affected the course of his life? Again, we need independent sources so that a reader can verify the statement if they choose to do their own research. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:27, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK,I will.please see page tomorrow.

And thank for maintain. ((World556 (☎) 16:33, 16 March 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Because He Struggles for Rajput Community to giving Reservation, and anyone others not can do it. ((World556 (☎) 03:49, 17 March 2017 (UTC))[reply]

This sentence is incomprehensible to me. Your link to Reservation is a disambiguation page, so I don't have any idea what "giving reservation" means. Why is he the only person in the world who can give reservations? I am going to be offline for a few days while I am traveling, I'll get back to this when afterwards. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 11:54, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More Revisions for Deletion

Hey it's me again, this time I'm requesting that these 3 revisions: [1], [2], and [3] to be deleted, because they are calling living people terrorists. Tompop888^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:14, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Tompop888:

Done 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:18, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Got some more that probably should be deleted. The edits of this IP address: [4] and this one as well: [5] seem to have some revisions that attack certain people and should be removed. A couple of examples are: [6] and [7]. Tompop888^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:21, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I revdeleted everything I considered to be an egregious BLP violation. Thanks! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:11, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Damian

User ignored your close and is continuing to attack me here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=772710537

Please put a stop to this. I am tired of chasing down every single place this user has decided to attack me at. --Tarage (talk) 22:04, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Tarage: Yes, I saw that. I was specifically attempting to close the goings on at Singora's talk page, as the discussion does not involve Singora. I'll see if there is an elegant way to close the battle WP:AN, but to a certain extent you have appealed to Caesar [8], so to Caesar you shall go. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 22:10, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I am unfamiliar with that saying, but also the link you provided is broken. Apologies if I complicated things but I was getting sick of being attacked in multiple locations without anyone even notifying me so I could defend myself. --Tarage (talk) 22:14, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and as I post this the link got fixed. --Tarage (talk) 22:15, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that's probably an opaque Biblical reference (Acts 25). And yes, that is precisely the reason I closed it at the talk page of an unrelated user. I consider you to be "notified" at WP:AN as you are an active participant in that discussion. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 22:19, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW it didn't occur to me to inform Tarage because I wasn't suggesting action against him, just trying to say, look, we can easily shrug off worse than this to express why I thought the block against Singora was excessive. (I also did not notice how old the diffs I posted were.) Factchecker_atyourservice 01:30, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, and while I don't think it is a *requirement* you do so (that isn't ANI, after all), it was related to an ANI conversation, and try to "walk a mile" in someone else's shoes, I don't think anyone wants what they did 9 months ago (an eternity in wikiyears) used against them, even if it isn't directly "against them". Anyway, thanks for the note, and happy editing! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:47, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a problem here? Peter Damian (talk) 08:20, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would certainly prefer not. Pointing to someone else's "crimes" does not excuse the behavior of others. Admin's aren't omniscient, of course stuff gets missed. Let. It. Go. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 11:59, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK. One rule for some, another rule for others. 'Let. It. Go'. Charming. Peter Damian (talk) 12:12, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am merely trying to diffuse the situation. If you really want to bring action against Tarage, bring his 9-month old actions to ANI, and good luck with that. In no way did I excuse the words Tarage used. However, I don't think it is fair for you to keep bringing him up in multiple areas. You are a valuable and valued contributor here. In my opinion you are wasting time better spent doing productive things. I am not threatening, I have not disparaged you, I am truly sorry this whole episode appears to be causing you stress. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:26, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Leonard Singer

Thank you for blocking the user. Can the edits be rev/deleted? Thanks, 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 14:19, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done I blocked for user name, I didn't check the content of his edits. Deplorable. Thanks for bringing to my attention. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:26, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated. Cheers, 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 14:28, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2017).

Administrator changes

TheDJ

Xnuala • CJ • Oldelpaso • Berean Hunter • Jimbo Wales • Andrew c • Karanacs • Modemac • Scott

Guideline and policy news

Following a discussion on the backlog of unpatrolled files, consensus was found to create a new user right for autopatrolling file uploads. Implementation progress can be tracked on Phabricator.
The BLPPROD grandfather clause, which stated that unreferenced biographies of living persons were only eligible for proposed deletion if they were created after March 18, 2010, has been removed following an RfC.
An RfC has closed with consensus to allow proposed deletion of files. The implementation process is ongoing.
After an unsuccessful proposal to automatically grant IP block exemption, consensus was found to relax the criteria for granting the user right from needing it to wanting it.

Technical news

After a recent RfC, moved pages will soon be featured in a queue similar to Special:NewPagesFeed and require patrolling. Moves by administrators, page movers, and autopatrolled editors will be automatically marked as patrolled.
Cookie blocks have been deployed. This extends the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user if they switch accounts, even under a new IP.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:54, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which would mean...

that I am not taking a close enough look at the article before nominating. Thanks for catching that. Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 21:34, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Boomer Vial: I wouldn't worry about it, that is a judgement call on my part. It was certainly eligible for G13, but if I see potential I try to delay deletion, because I've seen these develop into full articles if someone with knowledge on the topic runs across them. As I have no knowledge on this topic, I can't help. It might be a complete hoax for all I've investigated. All the best, and thanks for the good work you do here. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 23:11, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

50 DYK CE Award

		The 50 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
		for 50+ DYK creations and expansions DarjeelingTea (talk) 06:21, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On this day, 8 years ago...

Hey, 78.26. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! Mz7 (talk) 00:33, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft page Beech_Holdings deleted

Leverdavid99 (talk) 08:12, 18 April 2017 (UTC) Hi, I would really appreciate your feedback in regards to the Beech_Holdings draft that was deleted. I'm unsure as to how this is advertising or promotional, as it was written from a neutral viewpoint. Please could you provide further feedback? Many thanks.[reply]

The entire tone of the piece was promotional. Every single sentence within the article is slanted to make a positive impression of either the subject or its founders. Specific phrases which are *highly* promotional: "pace-saving, sustainable elements" "affordable and efficiently designed apartments for young professionals.", these would come directly out of a sales brochure. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 12:07, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Beech Holdings

Yo, 78, you deleted deleted this page last week- now been recreated- still looks like WP:NOTLINKEDIN to me- but could you compare it to the original, if you've got a minute? Cheers, — O Fortuna^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 12:58, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry- only just noticed your comment in the section above! — O Fortuna^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 12:59, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: No, that's an *entirely* different article now, what is currently there is a direct copy of Draft:Stephen Beech, not what was deleted. (ahem, cough cough). 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:24, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info 78... Hope that cough gets better soon! ;) — O Fortuna^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 13:30, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

re: Acte Préalable

According to Polish wiki they specialize in releasing classic, and they have recorded and released a number of classic recordings of stuff by reasonably famous classic artists that have not been released before. This claim, however, is unsourced. I did, however, find that they have an entry in the Polish classic encyclopedia PWN ([9]), which likely suffices to make them notable. I will withdraw my prod and add the link to the encyclopedia. Thanks for the ping, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:29, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ITrust

Hi! I was just wondering if you would be kind enough to WP:SALT this page. Thanks, Nicnote • ask me a question • contributions 18:51, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that seems like a good idea.

Done 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 19:11, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Super Fun Article Title Confusion

Hey there. I'll let you handle the SS Elektra/HS Elektra debacle, though I'd ask that instead of a redirect, SS is deleted outright and HS is moved to drafts. Once Shipster24 can find credible sources for their article, we can set up the redirect. I'm in the process of moving the rest of their articles to the draftspace as well, given that they're most likely notable (but I wouldn't know, there aren't any sources) but lack references. Shipster24 doesn't know what sources are, so I invited them to TWA; I want to give them a chance to still create an article with notability. Thanks, and happy belated record store day! ɯɐɔ 💬 23:56, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

see Talk:HS Elektra. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:21, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017 WikiCup newsletter

The second round of the competition has now closed, with just under 100 points being required to qualify for round 3. YellowEvan just scraped into the next round with 98 points but we have to say goodbye to the thirty or so competitors who didn't achieve this threshold; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Our top scorers in round 2 were:

Cas Liber, led the field with five featured articles, four on birds and one on astronomy, and a total score of 2049, half of which came from bonus points.
1989 was in second place with 826 points, 466 of which were bonus points. 1989 has claimed points mostly relating to anime and Japanese-related articles.
Peacemaker67 took third place with two FAs, one GA and seven GARs, mostly on naval vessels or military personnel, scoring 543 points.
Other contestants who scored over 400 points were Freikorp, Carbrera, and Czar. Of course all these points are now wiped out and the 32 remaining contestants start again from zero in round 3.

Vivvt submitted the largest number of DYKs (30), and MBlaze Lightning achieved 13 articles at ITN. Carbrera claimed for 11 GAs and Argento Surfer performed the most GARs, having reviewed 11. So far we have achieved 38 featured articles and a splendid 132 good articles. Commendably, 279 GARs have been achieved so far, more than double the number of GAs.

So, on to the third round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:16, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2017).

Administrator changes

Karanacs • Berean Hunter • GoldenRing • Dlohcierekim

Gdr • Tyrenius • JYolkowski • Longhair • Master Thief Garrett • Aaron Brenneman • Laser brain • JzG • Dragons flight

Guideline and policy news

An RfC has clarified that user categories should be emptied upon deletion, but redlinked user categories should not be removed if re-added by the user.
Discussions are ongoing regarding proposed changes to the COI policy. Changes so far have included clarification that adding a link on a Wikipedia forum to a job posting is not a violation of the harassment policy.

Technical news

You can now see a list of all autoblocks at Special:AutoblockList.
There is a new tool for adding archives to dead links. Administrators are able to restrict other user's ability to use the tool, and have additional permissions when changing URL and domain data.
Administrators, bureaucrats and stewards can now set an expiry date when granting user rights. (discuss, permalink)

Miscellaneous

Following an RfC, the editing restrictions page is now split into a list of active restrictions and an archive of those that are old or on inactive accounts. Make sure to check both pages if searching for a restriction.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

no

shut up ugly big fat self u are just a hater thats why people dont use wikipedia b/c it lies schools dont use .it jobs dont use it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.36.236.76 (talk) 00:27, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hah. Didn't realize I was making noise, do I type too loud? Ugly? yup. Fat? Probably. Big? no. Hater? Well, I deplore individuals who intentionally cause others pain. I doubt people don't use Wikipedia because I'm fat and ugly, your logic is not convincing. Have a nice day. (and if you get over a few.... things..... and want to stick around, please read WP:NPA.) 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:36, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Ramellogammarus similimanus

Please take a look and see if the ALT hooks meet with your approval. Thanks 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:37, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

7&6=thirteen Thanks for looking this over. I like hook ALT1, for reasons I described on the nom template. On the article itself, I think Graening should be removed from "Further reading." It barely mentions the species of the article, as the book is specifically about species found in California. I think this might be confusing to the reader, rather than enlightening. Do you think it should stay? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 00:39, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll defer to your judgment. I thought it provided a larger context, but this is a substantive area that was way beyond my ken. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:00, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, me too! This is the first biological article I've ever written, and if I hadn't run across an interesting article in the Oregonian I'd never have attempted it. Totally unqualified. I'll leave it for now, maybe someone with a biological background will choose. Perhaps I'll ask on the talk page of the article. Thanks again! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:47, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

I've made a few changes in the sandbox and kept it there rather just updating the article. How do i get to know that the article updated in sandbox is now good and do not have errors in it, also need to make sure that the update meets the wiki policies. Is there any way i can submit it for review ?

Hyderkazmi (talk) 08:59, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hyderkazmi! The best way to have your article reviewed is through the Articles for Creation process. Where is your article located, perhaps I can look over it and give suggestions. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:18, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@78.26 My article is Hyder Kazmi. I hope this helps. I new here on Wikipedia and trying to learn as much as i can. Any help would be appreciated. Hyderkazmi (talk) 13:30, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. This is not in the sandbox, this is live in the mainspace, so it is fully viewable by wikipedia readers. If this article is deleted, I would use the Articles for Creation process I mentioned, because you have an obvious conflict of interest. I see that 331dot is already helping you there. He's a highly experienced editor who will be able to give lots of great help. My only comment is that the article looks very promotional towards the subject (you), which is why we have COI guidelines, it is very difficult to be objective about ones own self. Another piece of advice is that the Internet Movie DataBase is not generally considered a reliable source. In fact, the only source I see in your article that might be independent and reliable is the Times of India, although I've known even that to be filled with press releases and other non-independent material. (I don't know enough about Indian media to judge the reliability of bhojpurifilmiduniya.) Therefore there are concerns about the notability of the article. I've just given you a LOT of wikipedia policies and procedures to go over. It can be confusing, but if you take the time to understand how this works, you'll find your editing experience here to be much more positive. Let me know if you have any questions about these links I've given you. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:54, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How to Improve quality of article Hindu Heritage Centre

Hello,

I wanted to know how I can improve the Hindu Heritage Centre article's quality rating as it is still rated as start quality.

Kushagr.sharma1 (talk) 22:20, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Kushagr.sharma1: I would start by looking at this page. The article isn't long enough to qualify as more than start class. If you help the reader have a deeper understanding of the center's history, and the impact it has had on the area and its culture, that would be a good place to begin. Hope that helps. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:17, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lots more

There are lots more pictures of the trio: All Star Trio at Flickr Commons You might like to use one that you prefer. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 22:46, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Thomas Koschat

On 19 May 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Thomas Koschat, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1970, Austrian Post issued a commemorative postage stamp honoring the composer and bass singer Thomas Koschat? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Thomas Koschat. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Thomas Koschat), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Ramellogammarus similimanus

On 21 May 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ramellogammarus similimanus, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Stumptown scud, a crustacean endemic to the Portland metropolitan area, looks like a "cross between a prawn and a potato bug"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ramellogammarus similimanus. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ramellogammarus similimanus), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:05, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RevDel request for vandalism

An IP made this edit which may need revesion deletion. Thank you, d.g. L3X1 (distænt write) )evidence( 02:03, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@L3X1: revdelete isn't required, as it isn't disparaging any individual or group, nor is it a copyvio. It is, however, purely disruptive material and I have revdeleted it as such at your request. All the best, and thank you for your efforts here! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:17, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

V-discs

Hello, 78.26. Might I trouble you with a basic question about 78 rpm records? It's not in relation to any particular article -- it's just something I'm curious about. I understand that, in order to increase the amount of playing time for their V-Discs, the US military made the records larger. But also, in some cases, they increased the playing time even further by cutting the discs so that the grooves were closer together (i.e., a "tighter" spiral). But that leaves me wondering why the record companies weren't already doing that. Was there some technical quid pro quo that came with cutting the grooves more closely (i.e., lower sound volume or some other degradation of audio quality)? Or did it require modified equipment that was developed especially for the V-Discs?

Any thoughts you might have on this will be appreciated. NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:16, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@NewYorkActuary: That's quite a question. I'm stuck between giving too simplistic an answer and one that is too complicated. Given that I've seen you around recording topics from the period that fascinates me (1890 - 1960), I presume you're highly knowledgeable, but if I use terminology you're not familiar with, forgive me and I'll do better. You should know I'm not a big V-Disc collector, I only have 9 in my collection. The V-Discs weren't larger, the 12-inch size had been in use since 1903 (mostly for classical and operatic music). There are two ways to get more recording time on a record: 1)reduce speed 2)use a "tighter" spiral. The second method is accomplished in one of two ways, use shallower grooves, or use narrower grooves. In fact, all of these methods had been attempted by the record companies. Victor tried the slow-speed method in the early 1930s with their Victor Program Transcriptions (overdue for an article). These were 10 and 12-inch records, played at 33rpm, but using a "standard", identical in width to the 78rpm records of the time. Earlier, Edison had made Long Playing records by manufacturing discs with extremely shallow grooves, but of the same width as a normal Diamond Disc. Columbia also tried shallower-groove discs (the almost-unknown 18000-D series). None of these were successful. Edison tried too hard, he made 80-rpm records that lasted 24 or 40 minutes, so the grooves were so narrow that the slightest scratch or littlest wear ruined the record. Columbia in the early 30s wasn't in financial position to make much of a success with a new expensive recording system. Victor had the most success, but their timing in 1933 couldn't have been worse, as it took new equipment or expensive adapters to play the Program Transcriptions. Shellac was also prone to wear and chipping. So Columbia's records wore out more quickly, and Victor's records at the slower speeds were prone to distortion, particularly towards the center of the disc.

Some V-Disc records are normal 78s, I have one made of shellac and a normal 78rpm groove. But most are made of an early vinyl (a VERY important development), and use not a "standard" 78rpm groove, but a groove width at least very close to the NAB standard (that used for "electrical transcriptions"). "Standard" 78rpm uses a groove of 3.0 mils, NAB uses 2.25 mils, and modern LP records use 1.0 mils. Using a narrower groove creates much less distortion as the groove gets tighter towards the center of the record. That is why LPs aren't subject to nearly the same level of distortion towards the label the 78s suffer from. Shellac didn't hold up well with the narrower grooves, particularly with the two-pound tone-arms equipped with steel needles that were standard on phonographs of the era. That is the real reason a vinyl-type material and/or narrower grooves weren't used earlier, the equipment everyone had in their homes, often dating to the 1920s or earlier, couldn't play these records well. It wasn't until the financially stable Columbia and RCA Victor of Post-war America threw their full muscle into the new formats, with completely new equipment, that a slow-speed record with narrow "microgroove" could be successful.

I hope that was helpful. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the great response. If I understand it correctly, it seems that there really was a sort of technical quid pro quo involved in using the tighter grooves, but not of the type that I envisioned. Thanks for clearing that up. On a slightly tangential note -- my father (who served in the Navy during the war) remembers seeing discs that were much larger than normal. Perhaps he was seeing a 12-inch disc as being much larger than a 10-inch disc. But a little more research has shown me that, before the V-Disc program started, the military was using 16-inch 33 rpm records and perhaps that's what my father was remembering. I think one of those records is being shown in the picture here (you have to click through to image No. 5 in the set). And on a non-technical note, you might enjoy reading an October 1943 article about the V-Disc program, which is here.

Thanks again for the response. NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:17, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Picture 5 is a radio transcription. That size (16-inches) was originally made by Pathe (they also made a 20-inch disc, I feel like an idiot, there is a third way to make a longer record, make a bigger disc, however Pathe didn't make longer records, they made the grooves proportionally longer so they played the same length as their regular records). Anyway, the first movie soundtracks were 16-inches, synchronized to a 7.5-minute reel, using standard grooves, gave you 7.5 minutes of sound, without having to get too close to center where distortion would occur. Soon radio stations picked up the format, and started using narrower grooves (the aforementioned NAB standard), giving 15 minutes per side. The disc you show isn't strictly a radio transcription, but was sent to soldiers so they could hear their favorite radio programs, although these almost always had the commercials removed. A good share of radio history was preserved because of these discs. Some of these War Department discs were meant for broadcast, some of these discs were meant for just listening in the hellish conditions. I wish AVarchaeologist were around more, he puts my knowledge to shame. I have about a thousand of these 16-inch transcriptions, about half which are "banded" transcriptions with music which was leased by radio stations (that's another story) and half which are old radio programs (and most of those are shows produced by the government for armed forces recruiting purposes, but they used top-name talent and some of the performances don't exist otherwise.) Anyway, Electrical transcription is pretty good. I need to add some pictures to it. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 05:25, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Inspired

By reading your page I now feel inspired to edit more and maybe create a page sometime in the future. Dinah Kirkland (talk) 18:47, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Dinah Kirkland: That's very kind. I'm not sure what inspired you, I'm pretty sure it isn't the layout... (ha!) We love content creators here. I see you've been receiving advice from RickinBaltimore and Dennis Brown. If one is known by the company they keep, you couldn't do better. If the voice of experience is worth something to you, don't try to create a page as one of your first efforts. That's what I did, and it is a bad idea. Get used to editing articles first, and learn how to use sources (I'd start with WP:REFB, boring yes but VERY useful). Let me know if you have any questions. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:26, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Will Do grazie! And I'm making friends with RickinBaltimore. Well... I hope. And what inspired me is how many edits you've done and much more! Dinah Kirkland (talk) 18:29, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2017).

Administrator changes

Doug Bell • Dennis Brown • Clpo13 • ONUnicorn

ThaddeusB • Yandman • Bjarki S • OldakQuill • Shyam • Jondel • Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

An RfC proposing an off-wiki LTA database has been closed. The proposal was broadly supported, with further discussion required regarding what to do with the existing LTA database and defining access requirements. Such a tool/database formed part of the Community health initiative's successful grant proposal.
Some clarifications have been made to the community banning and unblocking policies that effectively sync them with current practice. Specifically, the community has reached a consensus that when blocking a user at WP:AN or WP:ANI, it is considered a "community sanction", and administrators cannot unblock unilaterally if the user has not successfully appealed the sanction to the community.
An RfC regarding the bot policy has closed with changes to the section describing restrictions on cosmetic changes.

Technical news

Users will soon be able to blacklist specific users from sending them notifications.

Miscellaneous

Following the 2017 elections, the new members of the Board of Trustees include Raystorm, Pundit and Doc James. They will serve three-year terms.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't usually do this

I don't like to put in a second discussion but I wanted to say I liked how you responded to the 'no' discussion. That was a friendly way to respond to a hater. I admire that. I also don't ask this often but: lo amico? (Friends?) Dinah Kirkland (talk) 23:48, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Josie Sadler

Hello! Your submission of Josie Sadler at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:28, 3 June 2017 (UTC) 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:28, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:59, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BAN THIS USER

Hi there, I know I don't have an account but there is this user who continuously adds false box office data on tonnes of articles .If you don't ban them, they'll keep doing and it would never stop. Thank you! See here for their vandalism attempts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/130.105.215.94 60.242.83.242 (talk) 06:03, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 60.242.83.242. I can't unilaterally ban another user, that would be something for the community (at WP:ANI) or the arbitration committee to do. I can block them, but there has been no communication asking them to stop, or asking what they're trying to accomplish. I agree their editing has been disruptive, so I have given them a warning, and will keep an eye on their editing going forward. Thank you for your diligence! All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:09, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Need Help

Hello, 78.26. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Your assistance is needed!

Me and my Co-Editer BlbAtp Created a draft page called Draft:Dinah Liddell (Alice In Wonderland) But neither of us know how to insert images. I read all the guide's and even went to commons. Dinah Kirkland (talk) 16:48, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dinah. Where are the images located? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:56, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I'll ask my Co-editer. Dinah Kirkland (talk) 16:58, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I searched the "Alice In Wonderland" page on the original story, then I was directed to a link there (§§list of minor characters in Alice's Adventures in Wonderland). BlbAtp (talk) 17:39, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well that is my co-editer so there you go! Bello has the info that I do not ^-^ Dinah Kirkland (talk) 18:32, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So, there's an image at List of minor characters in the Alice series you wish to use in your new article? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:56, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

... apparently. Dinah Kirkland (talk) 20:05, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dinah Kirkland, BulbAtop I'd love to help, but I need more specifics. Which image is it that you want to include in your article? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:10, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know.... excuse my swearing but Damnit. I really need to keep track of this. Dinah Kirkland (talk) 20:23, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Let me know when you figure it out. I'll be here. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:48, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alright Bella or bello! Dinah Kirkland (talk) 20:49, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On the list of minor characters it has the picture with the description that basically says Alice and Dinah Dinah Kirkland (talk) 21:17, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. If you click on "edit source" for "Returning charachters", you'll notice the following: "[[File:Dinah and kittens.JPG|thumb|250px|Dinah, Alice's cat, in an illustration from ''Through the Looking-Glass'']]" The first part states which picture to use, in this case the Wiki Commons file "File:Dinah and kittens.JPG". The next part ("thumb") reduces the image from the original file size, while the "250px" states the size the image appears at. The last part is the caption that appears underneath the image. I hope that helps! I'm going to add this image to your draft, and you can play around with it from there. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:32, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thank you so much! Dinah Kirkland (talk) 21:37, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Thank you!

23mason (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

I reward you with this Cat and a User box I made.

🐼

Look at that face! Your argument is invalid.

Dinah Kirkland (talk) 19:13, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Josie Sadler

On 9 June 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Josie Sadler, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that "Dutch" comic Josie Sadler (pictured) recorded her biggest Broadway hit for Victor, but it was never released? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Josie Sadler. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Josie Sadler), 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.

Vanamonde (talk) 00:02, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Topic Ban/Privacy and Security Concerns

about saying there was community consensus reg my case. The only 2 admins involved in the discussions took my side and the rest were mostly meatpuppets. I found the claims so ridiculous that I didn't ask anyone for support or use my own meatpuppets (I actually believed wikipedia had mechanisms in place against such things). Very sad action of yours. If you would have looked into it closer you would have realized it was a coordinated attack on one editor to get him out of the way. Not asking for it to be overturned, Im just closing the account, much easier. Was just FYI.Asilah1981 (talk) 05:48, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That is not credible at all. Drmies (talk) 20:26, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilah1981: Yes, I'm sorry for the delay. First, I saw 2 admins take part in the discussion, Drmies and TParis. I would not say that either fully "took your side" although TParis certainly expressed some concerns on your behalf. The fact that they are admins is actually irrelevant, the decision was that of the community, not of admins. You seem to be under misconception. Admins have no more say than a "regular" editor or even a "new" editor. The discussion at WP:AN is there because usually a request for action is made that only an admin can effect. Second, I am familiar with a very good number of the non-admin participants, and I can assure you they are not meatpuppets of each other. It is that type of borderline personal attack which earned you the enmity of the community. I will ignore your claim that you have your own meatpuppets. Third, I agree this is a very sad action of mine. It is always a sad thing that the Wikipedia community feels it needs to prevent an intelligent, knowledgeable editor from contributing because they are unable to collaborate with others or unable to abide by the policies. The topic ban is indefinite, not infinite. What happens going forward is largely up to you. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:55, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I expressed my concerns with process. That shouldn't be taken as a statement about Asilah1981. It was a plea for caution to any closing administrator to delve deeper into the discussion.--v/r - T P 22:46, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

78.26, T P, Drmies I think we have lost perspective here. I have not won myself the enmity of the community, I know/interact with dozens of wikipedians with whom I collaborate and are thankful to me for my continuing support, even where we disagree. I don't drag them into my quarrels (possibly because I am naive by nature). I have, however, won myself the persistent enmity of 4 or 5 highly activist editors. This ban occurred at the time in which I contested the closure of an RfC which did not reflect the result (which deeply offended the closer) and delved into Syrian-war issues in an attempt to bring some consensus (instantly and accidentally coming to the attention of their most fringe and extremist "single-topic" activist editors). A perfect storm and a very well thought out time to initiate the ANI even on such flimsy grounds. Yes, it is hard to believe, but I have been "topic banned" from "all political topics" (wtf?) for telling WCM to leave my alone on my talk page in rather strong terms (I have asked him politely at least half a dozen times in the past). This is punitive and vindictive and diametrically opposed to policy, regardless of my past failings. Telling me that "a block being indefinite does not mean it is permanent" is simply not enough. I disagree when you say you admins have no more power than regular editors or even new editors. You have the power to enforce policy. In this you have failed your duty of care and, by omission, have driven me away permanently from the project. If you look carefully at my edits for the past month or two (prior to and during this whole agenda-driven ad-hoc kangaroo court was conceived), you will see how you have done this. In any case, I have given too much personal information away in this account and would like it deleted for privacy reasons, now that I have no reason to keep it open. I hope you may assist. Perhaps, Boing! said Zebedee can help on this?Asilah1981 (talk) 08:57, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You weren't banned because of a few meatpuppets or some activist editors, and if you say it's hard to believe that it happened--well, TParis, 78, and I have a few years under our belt. If you want to leave the project because of it, that's your choice, but it doesn't alter the fact that it happened after a transparent community discussion. We cannot "delete" your account, but you are welcome to walk away from it at any time. Drmies (talk) 11:55, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies I understand we have that option to delete our account for privacy concerns. Anyone I know can recognize me online on basis of information I have provided in my editing and discussions, as well as my username which is my birthplace and date of birth. I understand the same option was provided to WCM and Kahastok, both of whom deleted their accounts. Would you be kind enough as to guide me through the process? Asilah1981 (talk) 13:01, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) @Asilah1981: I think WP:VANISH is what you're after. Having said that, it's strictly for users 'in good standing'- not sure whether a massive TBan would arrest that. — O Fortuna^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 13:03, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

O Fortuna Both WCM and Kahastok vanished following a similar (and certainly much more justified, by what I see) topic ban, so should be fine, unless policy has changed since then.Asilah1981 (talk) 13:14, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get to some other points later, but WCM is awfully visible for someone who "vanished"..... 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:18, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

:D Yeah, WCM the Invisible Man eh ;) I assumed VANISH's what A1981 was referring to as I don't thnk there's any other way, is there? — O Fortuna^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 13:25, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

O Fortuna I don't understand why this is funny. WCM had a very public profile which was deleted by his request immediately following sanctions - this is common knowledge to all admins (if you don't know yourself, just ask - I am forbidden by policy to give details). Same goes for Kahastok. The difference is that my request is based on me being easily identifiable personally, often traveling in places where my political views are a threat to my personal life (that is the nature of my profession - I can provide you with IPs/photographic evidence via email to prove this if u like) and I belong to an "undersirable" religious minority in many of these places. My objective is the exact opposite of Kahastok and WCM who both wish to remain active and visible on Wikipedia and edit on the same articles where they were sanctioned. I don't and am increasingly concerned about the trail of personal information I have left behind. I want nothing more to do with wikipedia. Asilah1981 (talk) 13:37, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

78.26 Indeed, unlike WCM and Kahastok I don't want to delete all my past discussions/sanctions and start afresh with a new account to avoid scrutiny. I truly want to leave the Wikipedia project altogether.Asilah1981 (talk) 13:21, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note I belong to a very small community. My username is practically equivalent to an ID card. Was not smart of me to choose it at the time.Asilah1981 (talk) 13:24, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite sure why you want to bring that up here, in this rather public place (though less public than my talk page, 78!). Still, vanishing is the best option if you are really concerned, and given the circumstances ArbCom, for instance, might well support a vanishing, despite the topic ban. Or, you could have your account renamed. But I tell you what, though I love you like a brother, I am so SICK of your constant harping on those two editors ("unlike them I don't want to avoid scrutiny") that I am just going to block you for personal attacks, and if there's anything you want to discuss with a bureaucrat or a steward (see Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing) you can ping one from your talk page. Drmies (talk) 14:18, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As Asilah1981 is blocked, please conduct any further discussion slightly related to this conversation to his talk page. I am well aware that this talk page is less "public" than yours, Drmies! When I count my blessings, it is #1253. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:52, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, 78.26. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Goingboom526 (talk) 07:00, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Roy Wiggins

On 21 June 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Roy Wiggins, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Roy Wiggins claimed to have ruined 80 million records? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Roy Wiggins. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Roy Wiggins), 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.

Vanamonde (talk) 00:03, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]