User talk:asilvering

Archives (Index)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Draft:Brandsymbol

Hi,

I am attempting to create a page for Brandsymbol, but I got a notification that it was deleted by you. I want to create a page for it without it being advertising. Other places like Addison Whitney and Brand Institute have pages, and I would like to create something similar.

How can I do that? and how can I make the page not seem like an advertisement?

I am working on a new draft. It would be great if you could review it.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.181.208.21 (talk) 16:47, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

questions about some AfD comments

Recently, I have come across a couple of your comments at AfD discussions that I didn't understand and I'm hoping you can explain them to me. I defer to your WP knowledge as an administrator, but I occasionally ask questions so that I understand WP better. You just commented at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hamidreza Sadri about not wanting to close the discussion as a soft delete. I have no problems with asking for more input, but my experience is that usually a discussion with a nomination and two supporting delete votes (and no votes to keep) isn't closed as a soft delete. Also, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John-Paul Tran you "confirmed" an article was significant coverage when it was local coverage consisting mainly of an interview with the subject and his father. What did you see that I didn't? Not trying to offend, just want to understand. Thanks. Papaursa (talk) 01:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

No offense taken! Regarding the first, I take the nominator and one other delete !vote as a soft delete. When there are two delete !votes, whether I am happy closing that as delete or not depends on the arguments of the votes. In this case we have a "strong delete" that says only "not notable"; that's an almost information-free !vote, so we're basically back down to a single delete vote and the nominator. The nominator isn't sure either; we've really only got one totally firm !vote (yours). So I wouldn't normally like to soft delete there if it's likely that an editor would try to recreate it. But looking at it again, there's also this not-really-a-vote stuff by the article creator, which is close enough to an objection that I ought to count it as one, so I've reworded the relist comment to avoid mentioning soft deletion entirely.

Regarding the second, whether coverage is significant or not doesn't have anything to do with whether it's local. Here's WP:SIGCOV: Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. In this case, the subject actually is the main topic, and is even in the headline: that's significant coverage! Also, coverage is significant even when it isn't independent. This is, however, also independent - the article has a byline and isn't an interview. (Having a lot of quotes doesn't make it "an interview". It's probably not great journalism, but that, too, is another question.) When something is discarded as irrelevant for notability purposes because it's an interview, that means something that looks a lot more like a basic Q&A. -- asilvering (talk) 02:21, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the prompt response. On the first one, I was thinking that might have been your reasoning. One the second, it's always been my impression that when all the info is from the subject (or his father) and not independent research by the interviewer, it's hard for me to see how it's independent coverage. Not sure how that differs from your "basic Q&A". Papaursa (talk) 03:22, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, missed this reply earlier. To be clear, if you think there are WP:V concerns about a particular "fact" because it's from the subject's mouth alone, you're perfectly entitled to hold that opinion when it comes to writing an article. It's also fine to say in an AfD discussion that you don't think a particular article is very solid coverage for notability purposes for that reason - eg, if you were making a source table, you might call that one "partially independent" and note that it's a news article but is over-reliant on quotes from the subject. In a basic Q&A, all the information (except maybe a paragraph at the top, which many Q&A-type interviews include) is directly coming from the subject and is obviously completely not independent. -- asilvering (talk) 22:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Except for the one youth championship, which was never factually in dispute, I can't recall any facts in the interview that had an independent source (though it's been a while and I could be mistaken). It didn't impact the decision so I think we can amicably say we disagree. I do appreciate your insight, but I think it was your certainty that surprised me. Thank you for explaining your thought processes in these cases. Papaursa (talk) 22:39, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrator Elections: Discussion phase

Administrator Elections | Discussion phase

The discussion phase of the October 2024 administrator elections is officially open. As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• October 22–24 - Discussion phase
• October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
• November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

During October 22–24, we will be in the discussion phase. The candidate subpages will open to questions and comments from everyone, in the same style as a request for adminship. You may discuss the candidates at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Discussion phase.

On October 25, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from Vofa (13:52, 22 October 2024)

How to handle the erasure of my contributions by motivated users? Is it allowed to think that a user may be motivated to erase information? I abandoned several projects because of this. I am here to make an Encyclopedia. --Vofa (talk) 13:52, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Vofa, when you say users are "motivated", I assume what you mean is that they have some motivations beyond "create a better encyclopedia". It's really important to avoid making this kind of assumption - remember to assume good faith! I notice from your talk page that many different editors have come to talk about some edits that you've made, and they're names I recognize from various different areas of the project, so I don't think you're the target of some kind of censorship campaign (or whatever else). If you don't understand why someone is removing your edits, generally the best thing to do is ask them directly, but if you don't want to do that because you're worried about getting into a fight about it or for whatever other reason, feel free to link me to the dispute in question and I can tell you where I think they're coming from. -- asilvering (talk) 18:09, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi. The dispute in question is unclear. Im trying to be good faith, but what it seems to me is that it’s a blatant preventing of making an encyclopaedia. Please look at the Kazakhs page and look at the recent revert by the user https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Turkiishh&redlink=1. I’ve tried to talk to them but they erased they blanked their talk page for some reason. I’d really want to understand what’s the issue with my contributions. Hope you’re having a great day. Vofa (talk) 19:28, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

That user looks like they should have their actions investigated, actually, so I'm glad you brought that up. "Vandalism" means that someone is intending to cause harm to the encyclopedia, which really does not appear to be the case with your edits, so I undid their removal of your edits and suggested they go to the talk page if they have to. If there is an issue with your contributions, hopefully someone can tell you there, but it looks more likely that this is an issue with the other editor. -- asilvering (talk) 19:34, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Vofa (talk) 19:49, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Growth News, October 2024

Current work

Newcomer Homepage Community Updates module

We will add a new module to the Newcomer Homepage that will allow communities to highlight specific events, projects, campaigns, and initiatives. We have released a simple version on beta wikis and we will soon start an A/B test on our pilot wikis. This module will only display on the Newcomer Homepage if communities decide to utilize it, so learn how to configure the Community Updates module, or share your thoughts on the project's talk page.

One design concept aimed to increase constructive activation

Constructive activation experimentation

After showcasing early design ideas at Wikimania, we conducted user testing of design prototypes. We now aim to engage communities in further discussions and plan to run a targeted experiment, presenting a structured task within the reading view to logged-in new account holders with zero edits.

Community Configuration

This Community Configuration extension was developed to help communities customize wiki features to meet their unique needs. The Growth team is now helping other Wikimedia Foundation teams make their products configurable:

• The Moderation Tools team now provides Community Configuration for Automoderator. (T365046)
• Certain Babel extension settings will be configurable soon. (T328171)

Future work

As part of the Growth team annual plan, we will continue to investigate ways to increase constructive activation on mobile, while also working with Data Products to move forward A/B testing functionality via the Metrics Platform.

Community events

• Growth team members presented Community Configuration: Shaping On-Wiki Functionality Together at Wikimania (slides). The session recording is available to watch on YouTube. This session provided an update on the Community Configuration project and introduced details about the upcoming features that communities will soon be able to configure. Representatives from the Moderator Tools, Editing, Web, and Campaigns teams shared their plans for utilizing Community Configuration in the future. Following these presentations, the WMF Growth team's Benoît Evellin and Martin Urbanec answered audience questions.
• Habib Mhenni gave a presentation of how mentorship works at WikiIndaba 2024. The recording is available.

Stay informed

Growth team weekly updates are available on wiki (in English) if you want to know more about our day-to-day work. If you want to receive more general updates about technical activity happening across the Wikimedia movement (including Growth work), we encourage you to subscribe to Tech News.

Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

Trizek_(WMF), 15:43, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Good job with the AfD stats

Just wanted to say good job working through all the AfD stats on the AELECT pages, I know it must be taking a long time to do - just wanted to say the diligence and insight is appreciated! BugGhost🦗👻 18:22, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I've been hoping that this encourages others to do something similar for other things, since "divide the discussion by topic and discuss the topics neutrally" keeps coming up in discussions of how to turn down the temperature at RFA. So far, no luck, haha. I'm a little worried that this will result in over-emphasis on AfD participation so I'd like to encourage anyone reading this to start something similar for a topic you're familiar with and see where it goes. -- asilvering (talk) 18:32, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

I, too, would like to thank you for posting those statistics. I find them very useful. I don't think they place undue importance on AfDs. PRODs, CSD tags and AfD participation is the closest most editors get to admin work, and their approach is often a good predictor for how they'll handle things once given the mop.

And since I'm here, I'd also mention that I really enjoy reading your well-thought-out, clearly explained AfD closing rationales. Keep up the good work! Owen× ☎ 11:20, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! -- asilvering (talk) 16:14, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

You are really adding value to this new Admin selection process -- not just stats but also a lot of effort into understanding what the stats mean for each candidate.

Thank you! --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 02:19, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Glad it was helpful! -- asilvering (talk) 02:32, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Have you considered making a voter guide for ADE?

Category:Wikipedia administrator elections 2024 voter guides. I'd feature the category on the ADE2024 page, but ADE appears to have consensus not to do so. Aaron Liu (talk) 03:34, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I haven't written anything beyond the bits I did up on AfDs and don't plan to - that's been enough already! It's my hope that others can speak for other oft-discussed-at-RFA-topics they're interested in. -- asilvering (talk) 06:03, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Okay! It's just that I thought the AfD stats would do better if centralized lol Aaron Liu (talk) 10:57, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Hm, fair enough. That also gives me a chance to explain centrally why people shouldn't look at just the numbers. I'll get on that in a bit. -- asilvering (talk) 16:08, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Ok, it's up at User:Asilvering/2024 EFA notes on AFDs but only partially finished so far. -- asilvering (talk) 17:34, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Louise Glover Article - Concerns over Harm and Balancing.

Hello, I would like a second opinion on the content of the article 'Louise Glover'. As you will know, it was recently kept after being nominated for deletion. In the discussion, it was established that the subject is still notable.

However, I would like a second opinion on is whether the subject could be considered a low-profile individual.

I argue that the subject is low-profile seeing as the they no longer do modelling work and receive a lot less media attention than in the past. If the subject is indeed a low-profile individual, then are following BLP guidelines justification for removing their criminal convictions?

"Exercise restraint and include only material relevant to the person's notability, focusing on high-quality secondary sources.", "Material that may adversely affect a person's reputation should be treated with special care"

I ask this as the convictions have nothing to do with the subject's original reason for notability and they could also harm their reputation.

In summary, Is the subject a low-profile individual, and if so, is there a justified reason to remove material that could harm their reputation per the BLP guidelines such as their criminal convictions? Svenska356 (talk) 13:01, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

@Svenska356 (talk page watcher) It seems that the section was referenced by one article that was reposted to other sites. I found the original article, linked it as an inline citation, and made it clear that it was being reused a few times. I also removed a citation that was incomplete and indicated that another citation contained a dead link.

Since it's reliably sourced as having actually happened (especially important for living people!), it could be a violation of NPOV to remove the information entirely. However, making sure it continues to not be overemphasized should be a priority. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 13:23, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I think that the key issue is making sure that the article is balanced, so as to meet NPOV guidelines. The quote about the subject having no remorse could be an overemphasis, and could be quite harmful to the subject's reputation. I agree that the information should be kept if the they are still high profile. But, it might still be best to condense the crinimal convictions and put it all in the same place, so that the article is balanced. Svenska356 (talk) 15:17, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for getting to this, @I dream of horses! @Svenska356, I also posted this one to WP:BLPN earlier, so the folks who like to work on this kind of thing can have a look. -- asilvering (talk) 16:15, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

@Svenska356 Just to avoid any confusion, it was PamD who reverted my edits. Any further discussion should take place on Talk:Louise Glover to avoid further fragmentation. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 01:31, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

(ETA: Or, perhaps, on that BLPN post asilvering mentioned above...) I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 01:32, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

OKA cleanup listing - Coordinates needed

Hey! I'll start working on the "Coordinates needed" section of your OKA cleanup list and I wanted to clarify some things.

Is there a specific template to use in order to satisfy the demand? Or should I see case by case?

Some articles have the location template (e.g. Abbey of Saint-Symphorien, Metz) where I can input coordinates. Some others are very simple and do not present templates (e.g. Aleksandrów Kujawski internment camp); in these cases I was thinking about adding {{Coord}} to the top of the article.

Thanks in advance!

Sintropepe (talk) 13:23, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I updated Historic Center of Caxias do Sul with {{coord}} at its top. Is it right? Another question: how do we update the list?

Sintropepe (talk) 13:53, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Gosh, sorry, I have never touched the co-ordinates on any wikipedia article as far as I'm aware, so you're better off asking at WP:TEA. I think these are usually added to infoboxes, so I'm not sure why something would end up in the "co-ordinates needed" section of the maintenance list when it doesn't have an infobox. There are people out there who know a lot about this, but they're not me!

As for how to update the list, don't worry about it. The bot runs once a week, on Tuesdays, and the list will refresh automatically then. -- asilvering (talk) 16:18, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I have a suspicion I may be targeted.

Hello! I hope you’re having a great day. I have noticed that my contributions to the Bashkir page and maybe some more which I’m not active on have been reverted. The user in question is @Beshogur I have been threatened with a block from editing. My contributions have been labelled as “add a random spelling + asked for citations + erased sources” all of which are gross oversimplifications. I am not feeling safe. Please, help me and review the pages yourself. Another thing is that when @Beshogur said he “reverted the page to pre edit war” he did not do that, but instead reverted to the most recent contribution by the user @Turkiishh less than an hour after @Turkiishh made their edit. (No talk page was opened on the @Beshogur’s page by @Turkiishh user. Yesterday you said that that user needed investigation. Please help! The articles are Keraites and Bashkirs. There is currently an administration discussion regarding me. Vofa (talk) 18:04, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Asilvering (talk · contribs) I opened ANI about his edit history. Also laughed at connecting me to Turkiishh (talk · contribs). Beshogur (talk) 18:10, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

@Vofa, again, I encourage you to remember to assume good faith. I don't see any evidence (yet?) that you're being targetted. Your edits are being reverted, and the reversion rationales are often extremely unhelpful, and at any rate all participants ought to be going to the talk pages and not engaging in edit wars. But that doesn't mean you're being targetted - it means there is a failure of communication. -- asilvering (talk) 18:29, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Understood, thank you! Vofa (talk) 18:31, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:23, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Re-open ANI discussion on POV pushing

I am requesting that this ANI discussion: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#SheriffIsInTown%E2%80%99s_POV-Pushing,_User_Conduct

Be re-opened as I believe the user is continuing his POV pushing, I would also like to request more admin opinions on the matter after the re-opening of the discussion. Titan2456 (talk) 23:17, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Titan2456, I didn't close that one - the person to ask is Drmies. But you can also open a new discussion and simply link back to the old one, which may be a better choice. -- asilvering (talk) 23:19, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from Vofa (06:11, 24 October 2024)

Hello! I want to link the discussion about the versions of the Keraites page first. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Star_Mississippi#Keraites what to do if the wrong revision of the page was restored? I have explained my thoughts on the situation and overall want your take on the page revisions. Please read the Talk page discussion I’ve linked! Good day. --Vofa (talk) 06:11, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

If you want an admin's take on the page revisions, what you have to do is submit an edit request on the talk page of the article. Make it as clear and brief as possible. I don't recommend phrasing it as "the admin protected the wrong version of the page". Just say what edit you think is needed, give a brief rationale, and give at least one reliable source. -- asilvering (talk) 20:17, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrator Elections: Voting phase

Administrator Elections | Voting phase

The voting phase of the October 2024 administrator elections has started and continues until 23:59 31st October 2024 UTC. You can participate in the voting phase at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Voting phase.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
• November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

In the voting phase, the candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies for a vote will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Advice

Hi, asilvering, the discussion phase has closed, so I thought I'd reply here instead, just to thank you for your comments. Your advice is eminently sensible. If successful, I wouldn't see myself using the tools on Irish-related articles, except for, say, cases of obvious vandalism. That's a practice that seems to have been/still is mostly followed by previous and current Irish admins, with one or two exceptions. In recent times I've (mostly) tended to stay away from topics where things can get very heated, very quickly - e.g., American politics, the ARBGG issues, and - oddly! - Marvel superhero TV shows (/insert shrug emoji and a smiley!) Cheers, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 10:23, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Cheers, and good luck! -- asilvering (talk) 11:17, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from W0m4l1v2 (11:50, 25 October 2024)

I was asked to cite a source for my contribution to "No Worries". The source is an episode of The Fugitive that aired in December 1965. Here's a link to the transcript: https://transcripts.foreverdreaming.org/viewtopic.php?p=184271#p184271 I'm not sure I understand how to cite it properly. --W0m4l1v2 (talk) 11:50, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm not at all sure why the other editor has said "with different connotations" in their reversion of your edit. I've read the transcript and it sure seems like the same context to me. I'd go to the article's talk page and ask for clarification on that one.

As for your initial edit, I haven't checked the original source that was already on the sentence you added to (Hoffmann & Siebers 2009), so I don't know if your edit was incorrect - do they talk about this show specifically in their book? If they don't, the edit you made ([1]) is no good - see how it makes it look like Hoffman & Siebers were talking about The Fugitive? If you're going to add new information, make sure you're not adding it immediately before a footnote to a source that doesn't say that. It's an easy mistake to make, but a really hard mistake to fix, since it doesn't look "wrong" to anyone reading the article later. Thanks for editing wikipedia! -- asilvering (talk) 12:02, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

An interesting stat

With the caveat that 73% of statistics are made up ;) ...

I was crunching some numbers on administrator action statistics. Of all the admins who became admins in the last 2.5 years, you are the admin with the most average actions per day at more than 26 per day. Based on standard deviations on this population, this likely places you in the top 3% of the most active admins we have on the project. Please don't burnout :) --Hammersoft (talk) 15:11, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

That is interesting, and I second your comment about burnout. Asilvering, you do a lot at GA and your work there is very appreciated! I'd suspect I'm near the bottom of the list for admin activity. I was elevated mostly on the basis of good content work, and though I pitch in from time to time, I don't get through tons of admin actions on a regular basis. —Ganesha811 (talk) 16:25, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

I take this as further evidence that stats aren't everything and that deletion work shoots those numbers up real fast! I'm about to head to my cave for the rest of the semester, so I presume I'll be doing less. Busy doing all the writing and marking I neglected in October, as is my terrible and unshakable habit. -- asilvering (talk) 18:10, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Question

Hi asilvering, I am still finding it impossible to discuss edits with Shahray, already less than a day after their block expired. They made an edit to Kievan Rus' and subsequently restored it after I reverted them. They did not make another revert after this, but they replied in a completely different discussion on Talk:History of Ukraine saying I won't create hundreds of talk pages just because you always disagree with me for precisely no reason.[2] I told them they should start a discussion on the relevant talk page and that I would discuss with them there, but they stated: If you want to create new topic there, you can do it... And now, I ask for a clear explanation for why my changes are "synth" or "not an improvement", otherwise it's just another unreasonable edit.[3]. I reiterated what I said, saying that this would be a misuse of the talk page, and they responded: I shouldn't waste my time on interrogating you everywhere for "more details", you should give a clear reasoning for you edit from the beginning. If you prefer to give explanation in the talk page, then fine, do it there.[4]

I also noted that they had already started a talk page discussion before (as an IP) on Talk:Kievan Rus' about similar changes they made now (and a couple other editors had discussed this with them and there was no consensus for those changes). I was certain that this was them because I had previously reverted Shahray's edits before and the same IP left a message on my talk page asking why I reverted them.[5] After this they self-reverted and logged in as Shahray and wrote the same comment.[6] I told them to continue the discussion there as a result and I responded there. Despite this, Shahray said: This is not a discussion done by me, and looks antinormanist, why should I care?.[7] Then they edited the comment to say: obviously, do you know anything about this topic or are you just testing my patience?.[8] In their last comment, they once again imply that I am simply reverting them in bad faith: I just have no interest to wander in circles because of you giving some of the most minor excuses to not let my changes get in again and again.[9]

I have tried to explain my reverts using policy-based reasons but it seems that no matter what, they will always suggest that I just reverting them for no reason. I do not want to start another ANI discussion so soon, particularly if this may be viewed as premature. Can you suggest any steps that can be taken here to resolve the issue here, if possible? Thank you. Mellk (talk) 13:53, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

I suggest you to look at your behavior first and stop complaining to other editors like a child.

Typing "I don't think this is an improvement" and inserting a random policy isn't yet a proper explanation. I asked you repeatedly why you consider this a WP:Synth [10], yet you haven't managed to reply to me properly. This is your last comment: "Also, I have not seen the formulation "first Rus people" before". Explains absolutely nothing about why my changes are "WP:Synth". Because you never really give an explanation, you just force to constantly wander in circles.

You've also made a claim like there's no source that tells about "Rus' land" [11], when it's literally mentioned one sentence above.

It looks more like you are just trying to create most minor excuses to not let my changes get in. The fact that you don't want to further discuss this on the talk page and instead you wrote this message proves my point.

You have been already formally warned to not make unreasonable reverts, yet here we are again.

If you feel like you are unable to constructively discuss in this topic, then you shouldn't be trying to waste more time of other editors and instead move to the topics you're more knowledgeable about. This is my advice for you. Shahray (talk) 15:33, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Nah, I think you're fine to go to ANI about it. They've been blocked twice for this already, and now they might be doing WP:LOUTSOCK stuff. There was some pretty serious failure to "get it" in response to El_C's week-long block. Sometimes people don't course-correct and there's nothing you can do. -- asilvering (talk) 15:33, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Go ahead and use that reply above as evidence. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ -- asilvering (talk) 15:35, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I was hoping there could be an alternative way to resolve this without having to go to ANI, but their response above, along with the subsequent edits they've made and what they wrote on the talk page of El C has unfortunately made ANI inevitable. Mellk (talk) 22:11, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from Thewriterthree (20:03, 26 October 2024)

Hi Asilvering, it is a pleasure to e-meet you. I have added a citation on-to this article:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_New_York_City

And wanted to make sure I did it correctly.

The statement is:

"The beaver’s importance in New York’s history is reflected by its use on the city’s official sea" --Thewriterthree (talk) 20:03, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Thewriterthree, welcome to wikipedia! It looks like you did the first one correctly (the one on "Hudson's report on the regional beaver population served as the impetus for the founding of Dutch trading colonies in the New World."), but not the second. See how the second is missing "ref" tags? I'll fix it for you so you can see. -- asilvering (talk) 20:15, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Ok, fixed it. There are lots of easier ways to add citations, too - I tend to add mine using the automatic function on Visual Editor. (Press "cite", then drop the ISBN into the popup. It sucks at searching for titles but works fine on ISBNs, dois, URLs, etc.) -- asilvering (talk) 20:18, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Thewriterthree (talk) 20:32, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

AFD Redirect Questions

I suggested in redirects here? Are they reasonable, and does the AfD closure meant prohibit me from making them? McYeee (talk) 03:31, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Hm, I don't know anything about the topic so I can't really say if making a redirect would be a good idea. I don't see a good spot on Heat-assisted magnetic recording for those to redirect to (I'd be hoping for a section heading or something like that). Does WP:REDYES apply? If so, it's probably better not to create any redirects. -- asilvering (talk) 03:40, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Redyes applies. Thanks for pointing it out! I think the place I thought made a good redirect target was actually a single paragraph in hard drive, but that's not actually a good target. McYeee (talk) 04:46, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from L'Andreea (08:28, 28 October 2024)

Hello. I created an article about a month ago. How long will it take to be reviewed? --L'Andreea (talk) 08:28, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Looks like it just was! Unfortunately it was declined because it didn't meet the notability guidelines. I don't suggest that you keep trying with this one, I'm afraid. Wikipedia is looking for articles on people who are already well into their careers, rather than people who are just starting out. Sorry! I'll come by your talk page and drop you some useful links. -- asilvering (talk) 08:39, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from Sumanmali11 (16:00, 28 October 2024)

Hi Asilvering,

I am editing my clients wiki and one guys started to revert the changes. How can I lock the wiki page? --Sumanmali11 (talk) 16:00, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

@Sumanmali11 (talk page watcher) To answer your question, you can't have the page locked so only you can edit it. It's against policy to restrict editing for people who are abiding by the policies and guidelines, and also technologically impossible.

You have a conflict of interest that you need to declare on your userpage per our policies. Don't worry, we're forgiving of those who don't already know. Courtesy ping for Viewmont Viking I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 16:07, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for getting this one, @I dream of horses. @Sumanmali11, I'll just add that if you need a page locked in the future because of vandalism (eg, someone repeatedly replaces the entire contents with "penis penis penis" or whatever), the place to go is WP:RPP. Do not go there because someone reverted your changes to your client's Wikipedia article. -- asilvering (talk) 16:23, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from Beauthentic (16:02, 28 October 2024)

Hi, my goal is to contribute to the Wikipedia community by creating neutral profiles for notable people from underrepresented backgrounds. I already have a list of folks that I've written articles for that I believe adhere to all guidelines (neutrality, notability, citations, etc.), but would love to get your input before doing my first :) --Beauthentic (talk) 16:02, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Beauthentic, welcome to wikipedia! If you've already written the articles, no need to ask in advance: just set them up as drafts. WP:WIZARD makes this really easy. You can then submit the drafts to the Articles for Creation process for review. I'm happy to give you some feedback about your drafts, and so will other AfC reviewers. By the way, if those underrepresented people are women, you might be interested in joining WP:WIRED, which is a wikiproject that is very supportive to new editors. -- asilvering (talk) 16:18, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Asilvering! Super helpful. I'd love to get your feedback about my draft. Here it is:

== Layne Eskridge ==

Layne Eskridge (born September 8, 1981) is an American television executive and producer who has overseen the development of multiple Emmy Award-winning series. She founded POV Entertainment in 2020.

=== Career ===

==== Netflix (2016–2020) ====

At Netflix, Eskridge served as a creative executive overseeing drama series development. During her tenure, she supervised Ozark, which garnered 45 Primetime Emmy Award nominations and four wins between 2017 and 2022, including Outstanding Directing for Jason Bateman.

She oversaw When They See Us, which received 16 Emmy nominations and won Outstanding Lead Actor for Jharrel Jerome in 2019. The series earned a Peabody Award that same year.

Her portfolio included Dead to Me, which The Washington Post described as compelling television, and Top Boy, which won the 2024 BAFTA TV Award for Best Drama Series.

==== POV Entertainment (2020–present) ====

In 2020, Eskridge founded POV Entertainment and established a development deal with Endeavor Content in January 2021. Through this partnership, POV Entertainment began developing The Plot, a limited series adaptation starring Mahershala Ali for Disney's Onyx Collective.

In 2024, she executive produced Lady in the Lake for Apple TV+, starring Natalie Portman and Moses Ingram. She also serves as executive producer on Manhunt, an Apple TV+ series about John Wilkes Booth following Abraham Lincoln's assassination.

=== Selected filmography ===

==== Executive producer ====

• Lady in the Lake (Apple TV+, 2024)
• Manhunt (Apple TV+, 2024)
• The Plot (Hulu, in development)

==== Development executive ====

• Ozark (Netflix, 2017–2022)
• When They See Us (Netflix, 2019)
• Dead to Me (Netflix, 2019–2022)
• Top Boy (Netflix, 2019–2023)
• Seven Seconds (Netflix, 2018)
• Messiah (Netflix, 2020)
• Self Made (Netflix, 2020)

== References ==

Beauthentic (talk) 14:04, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Beauthentic, please just go ahead and create the draft, it's much easier to edit and discuss that way. -- asilvering (talk) 14:44, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

So to be clear about the process: that means to put the draft in my sandbox and then hit publish? Or should I be doing something else? Beauthentic (talk) 19:38, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

@Beauthentic (talk page watcher) You could do that. You could also create Draft:Layne Eskridge, and put the draft there. Either way is a legitimate way to create a draft. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 20:35, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Draft:The Land of Skulls

Hello, Asilvering,

I see you turned down a CSD G5 tag for this article because the editor was not blocked. But you can see if you go to Special:Contributions/Cassigad you can see that the editor has been globally blocked as an LTA. Exactly who, it doesn't say. I have a script that shows globally blocked editors with their username crossed out but if you don't use it, you should check out the contributions page to see if WikiMedia has imposed a sockpuppet block. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:20, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Oops, thanks for the catch. I was using a script that indicated editors who were blocked, but I didn't know there was one that also showed global locks. Thanks for letting me know that one exists, I've stolen it from your common.js for myself. -- asilvering (talk) 02:08, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

what to do about this

Talk:Russian language#The map of the geographic distribution of the Russian language this time it is not from a decade ago,but i saw some users message "It`s more accurate only in your head. Who are you, ukrainian warrior? Just the encouraged vandal. Do they even pay for your work? Fuc Count (talk) 10:40, 27 June 2024 (UTC)",seems like a violent message,is this one of the messages discouraged here Wikipedia:Harassment?? UnsungHistory (talk) 19:42, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that's not acceptable. I've removed that from the talk page. -- asilvering (talk) 19:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

But how did you do it? UnsungHistory (talk) 01:37, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering UnsungHistory (talk) 18:58, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed this earlier. Here is the diff. Does that answer your question? -- asilvering (talk) 19:07, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

yes UnsungHistory (talk) 21:27, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Your message about my edit

Thank you very much for your message about my edit of 'The Society of the Spectacle'; I wondered whether I was being pedantic. Thank you again.John Desmond (talk) John Desmond (talk) 20:35, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Fixing citations like that is extremely helpful! -- asilvering (talk) 20:37, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red November 2024

Women in Red | November 2024, Vol 10, Issue 11, Nos 293, 294, 321, 322, 323 Online events: New: Asian women | Geofocus: Islands Q-Z | Women in engineering Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements from other communities Annual Wikipedia Asian Month (WAM) is an online campaign designed to boost Asian content on Wikipedia each November. Unreferenced articles backlog drive. These Wikiproject clean-up lists offer a start to November's backlog drive, e.g. Women's History and Women writers Tip of the month: Looking for an image? Sometimes you can find openly licensed images at search.creativecommons.org/ Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 20:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Question from SahibSinghJi (23:11, 29 October 2024)

Hi Cocobb8.

I have joined to update and add new articles.

I wish to write about The Gurbani School app. Is there anything I need to know before I start writing new articles? --SahibSinghJi (talk) 23:11, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @SahibSinghJi, welcome to wikipedia! I'm not @Cocobb8, but I've tagged them into this in case you needed them in particular for some reason?

I don't suggest that you write about an app. It would almost certainly not meet the guidelines at WP:N, which any topic needs to meet in order to be eligible for a wikipedia article. I see you've got a welcome message on your talk page already - have a look at those links for some tips to help you getting started. -- asilvering (talk) 02:33, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Safari's talk page

Did my reply ping you in some way? Or do you have super antennae that pick up a mere mention of your name? :) S0091 (talk) 18:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

There's no guarantee I'll see it, of course, but an edit summary left on a prolific AfC reviewer's page that says "re Fram, admins are active at AfC" will tend to sent off the super antennae, haha. -- asilvering (talk) 19:14, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Now I have this picture of you as a faceless person with big antennae lol (no tin foil hat though). I hope Fram takes the suggestion to bring his concerns to AfC because, based on my experience, reviewers do a good job with neutral re-reviews (and I personally have a distaste for ANI) but I can understand if he thinks a broader audience is needed. I also left him instructions on his tp for resubmitting drafts on behalf of another user. S0091 (talk) 19:44, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

I hope so as well. The speed with which the backlog has been going down has made me a bit nervous that something like this would come up. But I think AfC will be less angst for all involved and lead to a more successful cleanup effort. -- asilvering (talk) 19:50, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from MarkWHowe (23:26, 30 October 2024)

Hello; Is there a way\ location, perhaps in my sandbox, to upload and store graphics like photos, diagrams, drawings etc? I'm thinking I could refine them in that place and then it would be convenient to copy and paste them into articles when needed. These would all be railroad related; photos of personages, maps, scans of documents etc. --MarkWHowe (talk) 23:26, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

@MarkWHowe, if you're talking about graphics that can go in articles where needed - as in, graphics that are compatibly licensed - the right place for most of those images is Wikimedia Commons. -- asilvering (talk) 23:29, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes. But I can't see where there is a way to find them again as my personal group of images. Hence my tho't of having such in/on my sandbox. I have bookmarked the 'upload wizard' but I'm wondering if it is somewhere in my 'tools' list. If so it's not obvious. MarkWHowe (talk) 14:39, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

I got the answer; Special:ListFiles/MarkWHowe. precisely what i was looking for.

Still wondering if the 'upload wizard' is somewhere in my 'tools' list and I'm just not seeing it. MarkWHowe (talk) 17:00, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

@MarkWHowe, I use the old Vector skin so I'm not sure exactly where it's hiding on others, but I can get to the upload wizard on Commons in the left-hand menu, under "Participate". The link is called "Upload file". Does that help you find it? -- asilvering (talk) 17:03, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Here is a link to all your uploads on Commons - is this the kind of thing you're hoping for? -- asilvering (talk) 17:01, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that is exactly what I want but I have not yet found a way to install the link in my 'tools' sidebar., or if that is even possible. I figured it should be a 'user log' item; nope. Or a 'special pages' item; nope. Somebody said I should see an 'uploads' item in the upper right corner; not that I notice. I am now simply bookmarking the pages. That works. MarkWHowe (talk) 18:32, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Random redirects

So we can have random redirects like Vulgar Turkish? This isn't a proper name. Beshogur (talk) 10:48, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

FYI, this user Mr. Information1409 (talk · contribs) claims there is a "vulgar Turkish" like Vulgar Latin, but that's simply translation of the Turkish term kaba Türkçe (see Ottoman Turkish). This user didn't even bother to try to create something, just a redirect. Beshogur (talk) 10:53, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I admit that, sorry for that mistake. It was something that was referenced in the Turkish language article. Mr. Information1409 (talk) 13:51, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

What you can't do is put a CSD tag on a redirect without giving a reason, where no CSD criteria apply. If you object to a redirect for editorial reasons, nominate it at WP:RFD. -- asilvering (talk) 14:55, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Ok, for the next time in other article. You can delete it, I'm seemingly wrong despite the fact that it were references, I didn't fully searched them. Mr. Information1409 (talk) 16:45, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

@Mr. Information1409, that was a reply to @Beshogur, not to you, so don't worry. -- asilvering (talk) 16:59, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

@Mr. Information1409: I understand your thing, but with all respect, there's nothing like "vulgar Turkish". Turkish language (aka Istanbul Turkish) isn't spoken in rural Turkey either. So your edits were basically illogical. Same applies for Ottoman Turkish article, if you read it carefully, it covered all versions. Beshogur (talk) 20:57, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from Rakeshkrish 19 on Heinrich Klaasen (13:48, 31 October 2024)

How to insert image --Rakeshkrish 19 (talk) 13:49, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Rakeshkrish 19, there's information on uploading images at WP:UPIMAGE. Does that help? -- asilvering (talk) 17:05, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from Hallowme (15:02, 31 October 2024)

Why do all of my Wikipedia articles for creation get deleted even if I had 200 trusted sources the the new article --Hallowme (talk) 15:02, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

@Hallowme, I only see that you've had one AfC draft deleted. Can you tell me what the others were? -- asilvering (talk) 15:08, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

I mean my article but I had enough trusted sources Hallowme (talk) 15:29, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Really? The article was deleted as a hoax. Are you sure the trusted sources verified the article content? -- asilvering (talk) 17:00, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Now that voting is over, I wish to thank you for reviewing all the candidates' AfD records. Your hard work is greatly appreciated! starship.paint (talk / cont) 02:05, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, and good luck! -- asilvering (talk) 02:07, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Talk-psychology

Thank you User:Asilvering for the message that you have left on my talk page. I understand now that you consider psychology as a real medical field that me as an old woman should rather not talk about, and you are %100 right. My question is if there can be a space in Wikipedia for social talk psychology for non-medical situations, where I would still have some life experience and knowledge to share. Chelky (talk) 02:17, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Not at all! Please do go ahead and edit articles on psychology, medical or otherwise - we just need to be following WP:MEDRS whenever we're editing something that contains a biomedical claim of some kind. I see that almost all of your edits to mainspace articles have been reverted for lack of reliable sources, which is why I suggest going through AfC first if you want to create a new article. -- asilvering (talk) 02:43, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

topic ban?

Does this allows me to respond on the talk page? If not, then please specify it, so I can ask broadly and reach consensus for my changes. Shahray (talk) 06:10, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

No, if you're banned from a topic, that means talk pages as well. See WP:TBAN. -- asilvering (talk) 06:41, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Doesn't this violate the topic ban? Since they are starting a RfC regarding the Rus/Russian naming they previously tried to change. At Talk:Second_Bulgarian_Empire#"Russian"_anachronisms they insisted on the "Rus" naming. Mellk (talk) 08:24, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, it would. @Shahray, I've removed the RfC from that talk page. If it would be clearer, I can broaden the wording of the topic ban to "History of Ukraine and Russia", or whatever other phrasing you think would be more helpful, but this is certainly the kind of edit you are not supposed to be making while topic-banned. -- asilvering (talk) 00:14, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Your closing of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shirley Clelland

Hi, thank you for your great work with AfDs. Looking at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shirley Clelland, I notice it was closed as no consensus, but I think that keep would be a more fair closing as there were no delete views expressed at all other than the nominator, and adequate sources were provided with two keep views.

Could you please consider changing the closing decision to keep? I know it has no material impact right now, but down the line it will be useful to establish a precedent should someone decide to nominate the article again in the future.

Thanks, --Habst (talk) 12:13, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

If the second vote were more substantial, I might have, but I have to say this does look pretty shaky to me. In lieu of closing keep, I'll re-open it, and we'll see if someone else will come and add some more affirmation. -- asilvering (talk) 00:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Question from Robert Justin 514 Gee! (20:19, 1 November 2024)

I'm currently experiencing a discreet lack of brunch. Thanks I am amused. Take your time, O-doogle! --Robert Justin 514 Gee! (talk) 20:19, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2024).

Administrator changes

• Crisco 1492

• Babajobu
• Daniel
• Elf
• Jayron32
• Thue
• Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

Maxim

Oversighter changes

Maxim

Guideline and policy news

• Following a discussion, the discussion-only period proposal that went for a trial to refine the requests for adminship (RfA) process has been discontinued.
• Following a request for comment, Administrator recall is adopted as a policy.

Technical news

• Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068

Arbitration

• RoySmith, Barkeep49 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2024 Arbitration Committee Elections. ThadeusOfNazereth and Dr vulpes are reserve commissioners.
• Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate from 3 November 2024 until 12 November 2024 to stand in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections.
• The Arbitration Committee is seeking volunteers for roles such as clerks, access to the COI queue, checkuser, and oversight.

Miscellaneous

• An unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in November 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:20, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Ban appeal by Shahray

Notifying you about the appeal in WP:AE. Shahray (talk) 10:52, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

How to change the name of a page

So the page that i want to change the name of is San Francisco 4th and King Street station,it is not called the 4th and King street station, it is called just san francisco station,additionally i have actually ridden caltrain to that very station,i heard the announcements and on the screens it specifically says san francisco,i am very confident about this and i even have a source [12] UnsungHistory (talk) 18:42, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

@UnsungHistory, you could open a WP:RM for that if you really want to, but the reason it is at that title is probably to disambiguate it from the other entries at San Francisco station. -- asilvering (talk) 20:08, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

They reverted it,they told me that it is potentially controversial and i should file a request instead of doing it outright for that matter,i do not get how is it controversial,but,how do i file a request for a move? UnsungHistory (talk) 04:02, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

The instructions are at WP:PCM. -- asilvering (talk) 04:09, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Happy Wikiversary!

It's still November 3 where I am. JamesMLane t c 00:40, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Oh, indeed! Happy 3rd to me! Thanks. :) -- asilvering (talk) 00:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

G11

Hey asilvering, I saw that you declined my G11 here. While I felt like the article in its current state looked a lot like an advert, with awards and stating the organization's mission, I don't want to be too bitey so I just wanted to hear your side of the story for the future potentially? Oh and can you potentially make sure that there isn't a copyright violation in paragraph 4 of the draft? Earwig's seems to indicate that it was mostly copy-pasted from this website. But of course I could always be making a mistake, just wanted to get your opinion. Fathoms Below (talk) 17:10, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

If there's a copyright violation, please make sure you tag with WP:G12, even if you think it's also WP:G11 level - otherwise it might be undeleted. In this case I think I can fix it with revdel, thanks for pointing it out. Regarding whether it looks like an advert, I absolutely agree that it's made up of Marketing Language that isn't really acceptable on Wikipedia (looks like that copyvio is a press release, which explains that!). But this contributor is a declared paid contributor doing their best to follow the rules, so I don't think it's appropriate to delete their first attempt, even if it's not what we'd really want. In general I'd say that CSDs in draftspace are way too bitey, especially G11, and they also make it harder for AfC reviewers who aren't admins to help out when the submitting editor goes to the help desk in confusion. And drafts aren't very urgent - they'll all end up going out via WP:G13 in the end if the editor can't get it through AfC. Unless it's something so bad an editor also ought to catch an indef for spamming, imo it's better to let them keep trying. Though I will somewhat hypocritically admit that I have a close-to-zero tolerance level for the "SEO entrepreneur" and "Nigerian rapper" genres of draftspace G11s. -- asilvering (talk) 17:22, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Regarding Draft:LatitudeLearning. I was just wondering why you declined db-spam on this one. Does it not read as promotional? Hitro talk 17:29, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@HitroMilanese, it's mostly a list of facts, so it's not so totally awful that someone couldn't use that as a basis to write something less promo. Will someone write something less promo? Probably not. In that case, @Hey man im josh will end up killing it six months from now. -- asilvering (talk) 17:46, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

WP:G13 - Explicit, Liz, and myself check User:SDZeroBot/G13 soon several times a day and try to postpone deletion for any promising drafts, while deleting the rest. It'll get gone eventually if no one improves it. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:49, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@HitroMilanese While there's some content in that draft that reads as promotional, personally I would have declined since there isn't any serious puffery-style language. I'd say it's a more ambiguous case than the one that I linked above and I wouldn't have tagged it myself. Again, probably my standards for deletion might be less tolerable than asilvering's. Personally maybe a deeper discussion on this could be had somewhere since people like my friend Hey man im josh might have different standards than me. But I was interested in making sure I didn't do too much, and thanks for asilvering for letting me know. Fathoms Below (talk) 17:50, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

G12 would only apply if there is no non-infringing content worth saving, which in this case I saw that there was content that didn't show up on Earwig's. That's why I didn't tag for G12 and only tagged for G11. Personally I feel like your approach is probably unique from what I've seen, since I've seen that you've declined G11s from even other admins. But of course I don't really have an opinion, there's always a chance another person with less tolerance would just delete it. Maybe I've just fallen behind things since when I was an admin a few months ago, but I don't want to be too bitey either. I think it's more of an area that the community hasn't really defined that well, especially with the current discussion around U5 at ANI. Similar to how draftification discussions can be a mess sometime. But yeah, was just interested in your opinion, thanks for that. Fathoms Below (talk) 17:33, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure it's unique - when I've talked to other admins about CSD tagging, I've mostly had the experience of having them agree with me that things shouldn't be CSD'd. Unique among admins who routinely patrol CSDs... maybe. But I don't think it's a good idea to calibrate CSD expectations based on the handful of admins who routinely perform those deletions, given what's happening at ANI and now recall. -- asilvering (talk) 17:50, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Yeah that's why I've been trying to kind of recalibrate if that makes sense? For the future with taggings that I might make while I'm patrolling and if I ever become an admin again, though I'm not 100% sure I'd be wanted for the latter. But there's a lot of interpretation that goes into this, so can you maybe point to some other admins who talked to you about CSD tagging? I'm just making sure anyway. Fathoms Below (talk) 17:53, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

I hesitate to tag people in because I think I'm probably being annoying enough already asking all my questions, haha. But there's Josh above, for example, and I don't think @Elli will mind a ping for her opinions. :) -- asilvering (talk) 18:09, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Ooh Elli? Can't wait to meet up with her soon :) Fathoms Below (talk) 18:11, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Likewise :) and I'm happy to give you my thoughts if you have questions on whether particular deletions would be appropriate. Elli (talk | contribs) 18:17, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering, @Fathoms Below, @Hey man im josh, and @Elli: (talk page watcher) As a 'low hanging fruit' AfC reviewer, I often nominate for G11 deletion when it's pretty obvious that someone has come here to spam Wikipedia, and not to constructively edit it. However, if someone were to decline it, I'd take it as a sign that I've been looking at low quality articles for too long, and that I need to touch grass. /lighthearted /halfjoke I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 03:04, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

This is a good response to have, that will do much to protect your sanity from SEO farms. -- asilvering (talk) 15:53, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi asilvering. Uh, now I'm curious why you just blanked this page instead of deleting it per G12. It seemed like there was no non-infringing content on the page worth saving. Only if the history is unsalvageably corrupted should it be deleted in its entirety; earlier versions without infringement should be retained. (G12) Personally, I've never seen an admin blank a page and revdel when the history seemed to be entirely a copyvio from a promotional account. Another admin deleted the same sandbox when I tagged it earlier before the account recreated it. Are you entirely sure that this approach is in line with our policies right now? I'm just curious since it seemed like an unambiguous case and it seems entirely appropriate to delete per G12. Maybe a third opinion from another admin might help but it's just new to me. Fathoms Below (talk) 21:32, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

The end result is the same - copyvio removed - so I don't know that there are any policies involved here that say one way or the other is better. -- asilvering (talk) 21:35, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Sure the end result is the same but it just seems... weird from my point of view. Maybe I'm just too used for things being one way rather than the other, but you have an unfamiliar approach to me. I guess we can agree that we're different anyway. Fathoms Below (talk) 21:43, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

That discourages people from tagging G12 because it signals to them that they have made a mistake performing tagging. Not everyone will come to your talk page to be assured that they did not make a mistake. It does not seem like a good practice at all to decline G12, blank, then revdel. It is better to delete and not send any confusing signals, and also not expose yourself to unnecessary questions. —Alalch E. 07:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Why can't i insert an infobox??

Trying to Insert an infobox on my user page, i copied pasted infobox wikitext from Template:Infobox Wikipedia user,that failed,and then trying to get creative,maybe write about myself via infobox country,to express my intrest in politics,by copying pasting wikitext from Template:Infobox country,also refused to convert wiki-text,it usually converts wikitext,what is going on?? UnsungHistory (talk) 21:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Oh wait,never mind,i figured it out UnsungHistory (talk) 21:51, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

but still,why is not the Wikitext working?? UnsungHistory (talk) 21:52, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Looks like you've fixed it? -- asilvering (talk) 23:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Umm,the wikitext is not working,i used the alternate way (through the insert option in edit mode),but i wonder,what glitch is that where wikitext does not get converted?? UnsungHistory (talk) 00:19, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't have any idea what you're talking about. Maybe someone at WP:TEA will recognize the issue? -- asilvering (talk) 02:43, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Question from TheSkillet (22:54, 4 November 2024)

are you a real person --TheSkillet (talk) 22:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes. -- asilvering (talk) 23:31, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Voorts

Sorry, I accidentally touched your edit when I was placing my vote. I already self reverted and replaced my edit (this time taking extra care not to be the WP:BULLINCHINASHOP.) Just wanted to properly apologize.

RCSCott91 (talk) 00:34, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

I never noticed! No worries. -- asilvering (talk) 00:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

You sure about declining the U5 on what has now been moved to Draft:Emmanuel Alexander Onofua?

This was created as a userpage. If you compare the username to the page content, it looks to me that this is a CV, not an attempt at a draft. E.g., text like this by an account named Eonofua, that is E Onofua, and a userpage that begins Dr. Emmanuel Alexander Onofua and continues with text like Highly accomplished finance expert with 10+ years of experience in investment banking, financial consulting, and strategic leadership. Proven track record of driving business growth, managing complex projects, and providing expert advisory services to top-tier organizations. Highly accomplished finance expert with a PhD in Finance and over 15 years of experience in investment banking, financial consulting, and strategic leadership. Proven track record of driving business growth, managing complex projects, and providing expert advisory services to top-tier organizations. Looks like someone writing their personal profile to me. Thanks, MarcGarver (talk) 08:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Yep, sure looks like someone writing a crap autobio to me, too. People write all kinds of those (we see them at AfC all the time). They're drafts. Crap drafts! But drafts. And drafts aren't eligible for U5. -- asilvering (talk) 09:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

I saw that at the time. I would have deleted per U5 and G11 instead of draftifying. I agree we sometimes are over zealous with U5's and would like to learn more about your approach. Best. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:34, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Maybe I should have just sighed and blocked that guy in particular for spamming, but in general my thinking is that if we're extending enough grace and good faith to someone that we're not going to make them eat an indef over their crap first edits, those edits don't deserve to be immediately summarily deleted either. Moving it to draft doesn't cost us much (only a bit more admin time than deleting), and it breaks the possibly desired "here is my linkedin profile" effect for the editor just as well as deletion. If they're a good faith editor making a genuine but foolish attempt at engaging with Wikipedia, they'll appreciate it. If they go to the AfC help desk or Teahouse in confusion, the non-admin reviewers/hosts will appreciate being able to see it (rather than having to say "I dunno, but it looks like your first try sucked so bad we set it on fire"). If they don't come back, it'll be resolved by G13 in six months, and if they refuse to get it and keep recreating their userpage, we can indef them and move on with our lives. -- asilvering (talk) 13:53, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Insightful. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:19, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

• Hi there -- If you don't mind me butting in -- I'm keen to share admin perspectives on what to do with U5–G11 tagged pages in the light of the discussion of Fastily's U5 deletions. For example, User:Billybilluk/Sample page, currently tagged G11, which I would probably generally delete G11 (but not U5), but I'm thinking (in the light of the above) you wouldn't? My feeling on some of these is that they overshare, and often give private information not only about themselves, but also relatives/friends/enemies. (This is particularly problematic with such pages from clear minors.) Anyway, interested in sharing views informally somewhere outside the Fastily petition. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 02:45, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  FWIW, I have more stringent criteria for honoring CSD's than some. Not sure I would honor that one. I do not detag them 'cause I know i'm out of alignment with other admins. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:54, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  That's very interesting to know, Deepfriedokra. What would drive me to delete it more than anything else is the names of all the subject's relatives. I tend to have three heaps when looking at G11: delete, grey area, decline, and am finding more and more that my personal grey area expands as I realise that there is a huge spectrum of response among admins. However, the great majority (though not all) of my grey-area G11s are later deleted by someone else, and some of my declines lead to conflict with patrollers (eg recently Draft:Posity Online), so I have been feeling rather out of step with community norms of late. Espresso Addict (talk) 03:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  I'm not so sure, @Deepfriedokra - of course, there's going to be a wide variety of opinions when you ask any 800 Wikipedians about anything, but I think there might be more sympathy for the "don't delete" end of things than you think. I think what happens is that all of the less-deletionist admins stop taking the tags off because they get tired of being yelled at by patrollers. Which means that nearly everything that gets tagged will be deleted, since it will just sit until it finds an admin who will take it. We probably shouldn't be calibrating ourselves on "it got deleted eventually" if that's going to end in that admin getting hung out to dry over it.

  As for this example... ugh. I admit that I have found exceptions to my ability to extend grace and good faith, and two of those exceptions are "SEO professionals" and "up-and-coming Nigerian rappers". As a promotional userspace draft on an "up-and-coming Nigerian tech entrepreneur"... I twitch and let someone else handle it. Yes, I know this means it will be deleted. I feel slightly better for not having pulled the trigger. -- asilvering (talk) 03:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  "I think what happens is that all of the less-deletionist admins stop taking the tags off because they get tired of being yelled at by patrollers. Which means that nearly everything that gets tagged will be deleted, since it will just sit until it finds an admin who will take it." Indeed. And over time, those of us who started out being inclusionist,-user/draft-space-is-rarely-a-problem–type admins either turn away from deletion, or turn into deletion machines. I am more likely to intervene for things where I'm prepared to strip out overt promotion, but it's not clear whether that's ok in userspace. I'd certainly be offended if someone I didn't know came along and edited my sandbox drafts substantively. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 04:00, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  Didn't think about all the other people named. Of course if there are minors involved, it needs oversight. Most of my Gray area CSDs get deleted. I learned very quickly after my return to just leave be. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 03:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  Deepfriedokra Thanks. When to call for oversight is another thorny one; I have had most of my calls for oversight declined, too. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:00, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  under 14 yo seems to be the threshold. YMMV. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 05:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  @Deepfriedokra, @Espresso Addict: I've been told the threshold is 15/16 years and younger. I've also had most of my rejected requests for oversight rev-deleted instead. I strongly suspect there's a gray area. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  I dream of horses I'm fairly sure I've been told that deleted articles even on quite young children (12–15) need not be oversighted unless there is clear identifying material such as telephone number, or some other reason for caution. But perhaps the oversighters all work independently as well. PS: Sorry to hijack your talk on this issue, Asilvering! Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 05:23, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  @Espresso Addict Perhaps I owe Asilvering an apology as well, since I was thinking about editors self-outing themselves (including but not limited to an autobiography).

  About perhaps the oversighters all work independently as well: I recently once sent something into User:Oversight, which apparently prompted a discussion aamong the oversighers as to whether or not it should be oversighted. It was oversighted during the discussion and remained oversighted. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:38, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  The trouble with oversight, by its very nature, is that we mortals can't see what is oversighted and what isn't. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  Huh, I think everything I've referred to OS for "minor outing themselves" reasons has been actioned. But then, my "this needs oversight" alarms didn't go off for that User:Billybilluk/Sample page. -- asilvering (talk) 09:42, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  [Missed this...] For clarity, I don't think there's anything that needs oversight in User:Billybilluk/Sample page (which seems to have bounced back) but unsourced personal info of that sort I remove from mainspace all the time, and even in userspace drafts that look like autobios, the subject is unlikely to have got consent from relatives to mention them. You do have to read the whole thing as sometimes similar profiles mention conquering drug abuse or the like, or even make allegations of sexual abuse towards identifiable people. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 14:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

  Yes, I would absolutely remove that stuff from mainspace articles. I end up having to do that kind of thing pretty often when accepting AfC drafts. -- asilvering (talk) 19:23, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello and thank you. Crafterstar (talk) 12:51, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

No problem. Good luck out there. -- asilvering (talk) 16:12, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

How to Archive conversations

So,I just tested out my new signature on my talk page (because I thought it is the most logical place on Wikipedia to do so)it works just fine,so,since it is working i want to archive it UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 20:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

I want to archive the signature test UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 20:46, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Do you need to archive it? You could simply remove it from the page. -- asilvering (talk) 00:46, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Well,Remove or Archive,I do not know how to Archive,and I am always eager to learn more Edit tricks!UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 00:52, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

WP:ARCHIVE has info on how to archive talk pages in general. It can be confusing, but basically all you have to do is copy the code in the table "Sequentially numbered archives" under "ClueBot III" and paste it into the top of your user talk page. That will set up an automatic talk page archive. Once the bot runs the first time and generates you an archive page, you can just cut-and-paste the section you want to archive over onto it if you want to archive something early. -- asilvering (talk) 00:59, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Sorry if i may seem too pestering,but what does table "Sequentially numbered archives" under "ClueBot III" mean UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 02:10, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm trying to direct you to the right part of the page. Do a ctrl+f (or command+f or whatever) search for "Sequentially numbered archives" and you'll find it. -- asilvering (talk) 02:22, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

This is strange....it shows 0/0 results.... UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 02:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Christoph Lüthy

Hello, Asilvering,

I see you are active on the project so I thought I'd ask you a question. I was looking at draft articles that were due for CSD G13 speedy deletion later tonight and saw that you commented upon this draft that you thought it should be accepted as an article. Do you think so? Enough that we should postpone this deletion? I rarely see comments like that on drafts that were abandoned so I thought I'd ask. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:08, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Liz, I'll try and fix it up. -- asilvering (talk) 04:12, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Yugoslav Communist Pirate Party

Can you find even one source for the Yugoslav Communist Pirate Party or Komunistička Piratska Partija Jugoslavije? Fram (talk) 16:19, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Fake ref's-- the hallmark of a hoax.😛 -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:25, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Oops, made a talk page thread about this already. But, basically: their website does exist, so if it's a hoax, it's not just a hoax on our end. But since they appear to have just started existing (if this isn't a rather elaborate hoax), you might skip the prod and try G11 tbh. -- asilvering (talk) 16:27, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pauletta Brupbakher

A tag has been placed on Pauletta Brupbakher requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Fram (talk) 16:23, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

"Pauletta Brupbakher" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Pauletta Brupbakher has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 7 § Pauletta Brupbakher until a consensus is reached. Fram (talk) 16:35, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Question from Kunchok Namgail Ladakh (15:13, 8 November 2024)

I would like to ask a question regarding benefits here in Wikipedia while editing and doing changes in texts. --Kunchok Namgail Ladakh (talk) 15:13, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to wikipedia, @Kunchok Namgail Ladakh! Ask away. -- asilvering (talk) 15:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

User:MalakFayedEUI

Wanted to see what you think. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:22, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I would absolutely delete this one. My reasoning here is that ChatGPT doesn't have feelings and we wouldn't want it writing Wikipedia articles if it did anyway. -- asilvering (talk) 00:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm passionate about deleting promotional autobiographies. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) I do have a concern about the fact that it's been recreated multiple times as a speedy-able userpage. If this were a draft or article, I'd absolutely nominate it for a salting, but it's a userpage. Courtesy ping to Deepfriedokra I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 00:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't think salting is a great idea most of the time, since that makes it harder for admins and patrollers to notice if something has been repeatedly recreated - that is, someone who wants to recreate an article can just slightly alter the title and go ahead, without it being obvious to anyone who didn't see the first one. Better to leave them as spam honeypots and block the spammers as they arise. -- asilvering (talk) 00:30, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Indeed on salt. Only me and @Explicit:'ve deleted it. Many new users do not understand. There is always User:Deepfriedokra#rDFO's rule of thumb -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:32, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Deepfriedokra and @Asilvering: I suppose you guys have a point. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 00:49, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Wild Wing close

Would you please summarize the support and oppose arguments and counter-arguments you identified at Talk:Wild Wing#Requested move 26 September 2024 and explain how you weighed them to find consensus to move? Thank you. —В²C ☎ 05:46, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

It's pretty simple: the oppose side says that the threshold of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is met; the support side says it is not. As for weighing them: the support side has eight editors in favour; the oppose side has three. The oppose arguments were not found to be persuasive by the support side. The support side has arguments that counter the oppose side; the oppose arguments depend on ignoring those arguments and on insisting that our guidelines are more firm about this than they really are. It wasn't a close call. -- asilvering (talk) 11:35, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Question about you close

Can you name a policy or guideline based keep argument that was made at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of World War II weapons of Turkey? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Nope, sure can't. -- asilvering (talk) 18:08, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

🤔 -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:11, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Then how did we end up with a no consenus close? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:48, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

If you think it's appropriate to close an AfD with two keep votes, a redirect, a merge, and only a single affirmation for deletion as anything other than "no consensus", you're welcome to take it to WP:DRV for a sanity check. But I don't think that will get anywhere (though you may find it personally affirming). Sometimes you've just got to sigh, roll your eyes, and try again in a few weeks. -- asilvering (talk) 18:57, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

So you're saying that there was no policy or guideline based deletion argument? I would also note that redirect and delete are the same thing in this context. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:14, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I did not say that. What I said was pretty clear: If you think it's appropriate to close an AfD with two keep votes, a redirect, a merge, and only a single affirmation for deletion as anything other than "no consensus", you're welcome to take it to WP:DRV for a sanity check. Redirect and delete are absolutely not the same thing, though I will often count delete !votes as "would presumably be satisfied with a redirect" if they don't give any reason why it explicitly needs to be deleted or why a redirect is undesirable. In this case we also had two potential targets, with no later participants expressing a preference for either of them. -- asilvering (talk) 13:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Why did you not do what you often do here? You still have not explained how you get to no consensus if there are only policy based arguments on one side. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:40, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I did not do that because In this case we also had two potential targets, with no later participants expressing a preference for either of them. I found no consensus for deletion because I saw no consensus for deletion. I don't get to overrule 2/3 of the participants simply because I think they're not doing AfD "correctly". What I can do is close the discussion as no consensus, so that it can be relisted again soon for another try, if anyone is so inclined. -- asilvering (talk) 19:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Aren't you required to discount or disregard arguments which are not based in policy or guideline? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 20:13, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

If you think it's appropriate to close an AfD with two keep votes, a redirect, a merge, and only a single affirmation for deletion as anything other than "no consensus", you're welcome to take it to WP:DRV for a sanity check. -- asilvering (talk) 20:31, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

That doesn't add up, you don't seem to be counting Conyo14 at all and "No compelling reason that it should exist." is affirmation for deletion... And you can't say its two potential targets when it says "for instance" Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:10, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

If you think my close was inappropriate you are welcome to take it to WP:DRV for a sanity check. -- asilvering (talk) 22:14, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I can't know that unless you explain your close, which you haven't done if you haven't said how you accounted for Conyo14's contribution. You are also clearly wrong about there being two two potential targets as one is qualified with "for instance" meaning that it can't competently be interpreted as exlusive Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:19, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Horse Eye's Back Asilvering has been clear that they aren't changing their position, and that DRV is an appropriate venue for further discussion. Please respect that boundary. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 22:26, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

They're not at all being clear about that, but if thats what you want we can can all go to DRV. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:30, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I've explained the close several times. You don't like the explanation; that's fine. You're not forced to like it. But I absolutely have explained it. I don't know why you, as the delete !voter, would want to fight it, since a no-consensus close leaves it open for relisting and deletion, but you're not forced to accept it, either. DRV has been open to you this whole time. -- asilvering (talk) 22:34, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

This is only the second or third time I've ever contested a close, if you had compentently explained your position we wouldn't be at DRV. You're insisted on providing the bare minimum that you think needs to be provided at each step of the process and I just don't get it. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:39, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@Horse Eye's Back, the first relist comment said there was no consensus, there was a new type of !vote (for merge) following that one, it was again relisted as no consensus yet, and then you formalized the position you'd already taken at the beginning of the AfD. It was "no consensus" the entire time. I don't know how this outcome could possibly be a surprise. Again, I've said from the beginning that you're welcome to take it to DRV for a sanity check. -- asilvering (talk) 22:53, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I did, the notice is below. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:56, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Question from 24carly (10:21, 10 November 2024)

How do I add a biography here --24carly (talk) 10:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi 24carly, welcome to wikipedia! The short answer is, I'm afraid, that you don't. Please see WP:AUTOBIO. -- asilvering (talk) 13:15, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

You forgot to move the talk page

@Asilvering: Hi, thank sfor your help with the History of the Jews in Madagascar. However, you forgot to move the talk page as well. Could you please fix that. Thank you so much! IZAK (talk) 12:11, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Weird. Thanks for letting me know! I've fixed that. -- asilvering (talk) 13:13, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, IZAK (talk) 17:16, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Can you help?

@Asilvering: I was wondering if you could help out with another move of History of Moroccan Jews to the original title of History of the Jews in Morocco requiring admin help. See my statement at User talk:NAADAAN#History of the Jews in Morocco. In this case there was no WP:RM and the user who made the change has apologized [13] for making a move against the WP:CONSENSUS. Thank you so much! IZAK (talk) 17:24, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

oh for pete's sake. Ok, I've also move-protected the page. There's no good reason to move that without another RM anyway. -- asilvering (talk) 19:16, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Minor help with another one

@Asilvering: Thanks for all your help. Thank you for helping me with the Wikipedia:Cleanup I am doing, fixing minor errors with articles in Category:Jewish history by country as I discover minor inconsistencies that need fixing. Here's another one I just came across: History of Jews in Somalia that needs to be moved to History of the Jews in Somalia because somewhere along the line someone changed it without any WP:RM and it therefore needs to adhere to the WP:CONSENSUS arrived at, at Talk:History of the Jews in Abkhazia#Requested move 5 June 2020 to KEEP the name/s "History of the Jews in ___" and to NOT change them, and at the recent decision at Talk:Jews in Madagascar#Requested move 1 November 2024 to move such articles to their correct titles of "History of the Jews in (country)". Sorry for the bother and thanks again for all your help with this task! IZAK (talk) 01:33, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Actually, it looks like this article post-dates those discussions and was created at this location and no one noticed the problem until now. Since it doesn't seem likely to be contentious I've gone ahead and done a page swap, but if someone reverts me, that won't actually be out of process - you'll have to set up a proper RM for that. -- asilvering (talk) 01:40, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! IZAK (talk) 03:36, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

And another one

@Asilvering: This one stands out like a sore thumb: Georgian Jews should be History of the Jews in Georgia (country) as it originally was named. Thank you! IZAK (talk) 03:35, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@IZAK, can you open a WP:RM for this one? I don't think it's wholly uncontroversial. It's been at this title relatively briefly, but it looks like there's been dispute in the past over what the bit following "History of the Jews in..." ought to be. Along with the version you've suggested, there's History of the Jews in Georgia and History of the Jews in the Republic of Georgia as possibilities, and presumably others that haven't been tried yet or that I haven't found. -- asilvering (talk) 19:40, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering: Good idea. Would it be too much bother if I asked you to set up the RM, I have not done it myself in a very long time. Thanks so much, IZAK (talk) 22:18, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Ok, I've started the RM just now, and the bot will be by soon to do the rest. -- asilvering (talk) 20:57, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering: Thank you so much for all your help. Much appreciated! IZAK (talk) 00:14, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Deletion review for List of World War II weapons of Turkey

An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of World War II weapons of Turkey. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:32, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Help with Draft Revisit

Hello!

I noticed you looked over my proposal draft for Glenner Anderon- Alaskan Radio DJ. I wanted to ask if you could help me with his early life location. He mentions much of the early life information on the podcast mentioned in the last paragraph. To add, I am his daughter, so many of these stories are fairly solidified both by witness and by his own word of mouth. Is there any way to cite that sort of information that has been discussed specifically on his podcast? Or should I delete his early life all together since its only an audio source? Thanks! Rea5145 (talk) 01:41, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Audio sources are fine - you just need to cite them! A reader needs to be able to verify that the information in the article is correct, so the source needs to be something that a reader can get a hold of (and not "his daughter knows this"). But I admit I was hoping for a secondary source that would help us more clearly establish that he meets our notability guidelines (see WP:GNG, WP:NBIO). Any secondary sources you can find would be of help there. -- asilvering (talk) 01:52, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Permission removal

Hello @Asilvering:

I'm requesting my pending changes reviewer permission to be removed from me. I now realize don't review them enough to justify having them. You're really the only admin I know, hence the request going on your talk page. Thanks! — BerryForPerpetuity (talk) 13:55, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Done! If you want them back, should be no problem to re-request. -- asilvering (talk) 18:32, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Transportation

I am a single mother who is back in school. My daughter goes to Dean College in Franklin mass our car is no longer working. We could use all the help possible. I don’t want to have to have either one of us or both of us drop out of school because of a car. Denise lussier (talk) 15:33, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

If Wikipedia is now operating a ride service, I could use a ride to and from the eye doctor's on December 16th. 🚙 -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:39, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Denise lussier, I'm just here to help with questions about Wikipedia, I'm afraid, but it looks like there are options for students at Dean College through Gatra GO: [14]. You might also try contacting the Registrar at Dean ([15]) - they won't be able to help you directly but they should know what other services they have for students and how to refer you to them. Good luck. -- asilvering (talk) 21:02, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Shahray

Hi Asilvering. Can you check this SPI if you have any spare time? This looks like an obvious WP:DUCK but I am not sure if I have missed anything else. Thanks. Mellk (talk) 20:51, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Oh dear. I wondered where they'd gone. I'm not inclined to duck-block but a CU will swing by for a look soon enough. -- asilvering (talk) 21:30, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

No worries, thanks. Is it worth adding a CU request in this case? I never really ask for CU attention. Mellk (talk) 21:37, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm no SPI expert, but I'd ask for one if it were me setting up the SPI. No one's told me off for that yet, anyway. -- asilvering (talk) 21:41, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I have requested CU now. Mellk (talk) 21:58, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Sigh. Turns out there was another sock as well. I really hope I do not have to spend more time dealing with socks, I already spend more than enough time doing that. Mellk (talk) 22:24, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Semi-Protect a page request

So I was on the Allied Invasion of Italy (1943) page,whilst searching for who said 17 september 1943 is the end date,I noticed a lot of revisions containing vandalism,the earliest i can find is here there are way more I have found throughout the history of the page and nobody ever even SEMI protected it UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 22:27, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

There's no reason to semi-protect this page. It isn't edited very often. -- asilvering (talk) 22:37, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

What does "edited very often" or "isn't edited very often" mean on wikipedia exactly? UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 22:46, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Like,what average timelength between edits is considered often UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 22:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:06, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm honestly not sure if there's a general rule, since it also comes down to things like how visible the page is and how bad the edits are. WP:SEMIGUIDE has some more info. On the article you've linked, the last 50 edits go all the way back to January of this year. Whatever is happening there, it's not urgent. -- asilvering (talk) 23:10, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allied_invasion_of_Italy&direction=next&oldid=844907130,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allied_invasion_of_Italy&direction=next&oldid=851044027,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allied_invasion_of_Italy&direction=next&oldid=851044281,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allied_invasion_of_Italy&direction=next&oldid=851044581,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allied_invasion_of_Italy&direction=next&oldid=851044925. UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 00:41, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allied_invasion_of_Italy&direction=next&oldid=34134904,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allied_invasion_of_Italy&direction=next&oldid=34901869,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allied_invasion_of_Italy&direction=next&oldid=34901941,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allied_invasion_of_Italy&direction=next&oldid=34902036,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allied_invasion_of_Italy&direction=next&oldid=34902125,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allied_invasion_of_Italy&direction=next&oldid=34902232,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allied_invasion_of_Italy&direction=next&oldid=34905806,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allied_invasion_of_Italy&direction=next&oldid=34905835,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allied_invasion_of_Italy&direction=next&oldid=34905998,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allied_invasion_of_Italy&direction=next&oldid=34906232, UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 00:58, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the page has been vandalised in the past. That happens to Wikipedia articles. It's part of being the encyclopedia anyone can edit. -- asilvering (talk) 02:53, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

User:Hninsiphyutoxica

Hey, heads up it seems like User:Hninsiphyutoxica is operating a WP:LOUTSOCK to avoid their topic block for the page Nang Khin Zay Yar.

They uploaded this image (again) to Commons, then added it to the article here, and previously here, under a different IP in the same range.

(ANI thread reminder in case you need to be reminded of the backstory: WP:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1171#User:Hninsiphyutoxica RachelTensions (talk) 15:46, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) I semi protected X 12 hours pending check by Asilvering. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:03, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

a;dlkfhadslf that is definitely not the result I hoped for with this experiment -- asilvering (talk) 16:50, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

It's the thought that counts :)

I still have no idea what they're up to, dunno what's so special about a graduation photo of a Burmese model that warrants such cagey behaviour RachelTensions (talk) 17:15, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Well, I've altered the block on the account to be a mainspace-wide block and reset the autoblock. I don't really want to indefinitely semi-protect the article because this isn't harmful, exactly, it's just very stupid. And now we wait again, I guess. Any passing talk-page-stalking admins are welcome to take whatever action. -- asilvering (talk) 18:51, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

AFDs

Hello, asilvering,

I was just wondering what your reason was for closing some AFD discussion hours early. It didn't seem like there was disruption going on or a need to rush the process, it's not a race. These were not relisted discussions that are eligible to be closed early, they were just regular AFD discussions. I just thought you might have an explanation. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Here's an example of one but there were others tonight that were closed 5 or 6 hours early: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Kerh (1516). Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:32, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Hm, I'm not sure why I closed that one early, since it only has two delete !votes. If you hadn't pointed that one out in specific, I'd have said that I was only closing the very snowy ones early (there were a bunch yesterday that had something like six delete !votes and really no possibility for a keep argument, let alone a successful one). That one is definitely an error. -- asilvering (talk) 16:07, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

UTRS appeal #96597

would it be possible for you to review and action this request? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:02, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

If I respond with "leave a comment", is that one of the green comments or a blue one? I've never touched UTRS before and haven't found any non-technical docs for it. Also, this is a terrible present. -- asilvering (talk) 16:25, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

The blue goes to the appellant, and there is a number of templates to choose from. The green are for us to discuss by. You are welcome.😛 -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:05, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Wonderful. My first ever post to UTRS is blank. Joining you on the old and senile crew. -- asilvering (talk) 17:07, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

If you just leave a comment with a recommendation- restore TPA and carry tpWP:AN, decline, ban, etc, it would be a help. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:07, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I just cannot deal with him anymore. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:08, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Deepfriedokra, can I call in a "you owe me one"? [16]. -- asilvering (talk) 03:53, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

That sounds scary. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:04, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Nothing terrifying, just, uh, long. -- asilvering (talk) 08:19, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

You were generous. Thank you.

I suspect no good deed goes unpunished! Draft:Gayla Kraetsch Hartsough has been edited rather than started afresh and remains, in my view, inappropriate since it was submitted after editing in a state which did not allow acceptance. More as a courtesy to you and your act of generosity, I declined it with a substantial rationale rather than go for my gust instinct which was to put it out of its misery. I have told the autobiographer that it was as a courtesy to them. My day is now full to the brim of courtesy. It was a good deed. I think you did the right thing for the right reasons. I often wonder why helping folk here backfires! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:23, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

I think it backfires more often than it helps, but I cling to that small % for whom it helps. And I try to remember that other people can read these interactions, and it forms their opinions on the site as a whole. Those silent readers who aren't causing problems can turn out to be good contributors. (I was one of them.) -- asilvering (talk) 16:15, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

AfD Appeal

Hello @asilvering,

I wanted to make a request about this AfD(Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isaac Anderson (model) (XFDcloser) if it can be restored as things have changed significantly since it was last deleted. I noticed the reason it was deleted was because of the verifiability and independence of the sources. I found a list of reliable Ghanaian sources according to(https:en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol/Source_guide_discussions/Ghana) some of which has covered the subject significantly and in-depth. I hope you look into this and restore this article. Louisvmark (talk) 20:56, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Sure @Louisvmark, this was soft-deleted, so I can restore it and send it to userspace for you to work on it. -- asilvering (talk) 20:58, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @asilvering for restoring it to my userspace. I have made all the corrections(including correcting promotional tones), can you check if everything is good and if it is move it to the mainspace?. Louisvmark (talk) 01:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

I've moved it to draft for you - just hit the blue button to submit it for review if you think it's ready. I think it might be declined, but if that happens you will still be able to keep working on it and you can wait for more sources to come out, or go looking for if there are any you've missed. -- asilvering (talk) 01:24, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

is it really gonna take AT LEAST 6 weeks before it could be reviewed?

Draft:Utah Constitutional Sovereignity Act,2024,is the first draft that I have ever published,it says "This may take 6 weeks or more" UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 01:02, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

It probably won't take 6 weeks. Most drafts are dealt with in under 24 hours; the rest are usually addressed within a week. But if yours still hasn't been reviewed by the time a week is up, yes, it might be as long as six weeks - at that point it becomes pretty random. -- asilvering (talk) 01:26, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering,I also now have a different question, there is something that is possible,but is there a legitimate use for that?namely:Go to an Article,press move,then under "new title:"there is a box,where you press and scroll,and one of the options is to convert it into a user page,like,annexing an article for yourself.... UnsungHistory (Questions?) (Did I mess up?) 23:42, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Sure. It sounds like you're talking about the page move interface? You can move pages from one namespace to another. So for example, if someone asks for an article to be undeleted so they can work on it, I will undelete it and then move it to that editor's userspace so they can do that without it being deleted again before they're finished. -- asilvering (talk) 02:00, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Chrishantha Abeysena

cc: @Dan arndt:

Chrishantha Abeysena just sworn in as the new minister of Science and Technology, therefore the subject pass WP:POLITICIAN. However, I object this particular draft on the grounds of WP:UPE. I raised my concerns in this SPI and with this admin. A couple editors create bios of newly elected MPs, I would rather let such genuine editors create the article instead of dodgy editors. Regards, Chanaka L (talk) 05:39, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Wow. Published to mainspace immediately after I declined the G11, I see. Not a great look. -- asilvering (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

• @Chanakal:, it's annoying when individuals use Wikipedia to promote themselves - requires an independent editor to create the article not the individual. Dan arndt (talk) 06:35, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

  @Chanakal, @Dan arndt, and asilvering: It's likely that a recently sworn in politician would pass a WP:BEFORE search a few hours after the swearing in. If so, in that situation, I often do a "tag-and-release." Put up the needful cleanup tags (which almost invariably include {{sources exist}}), and otherwise let the article be...unless the UPE reverts the tagging without improving the article, which is objectively problematic. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 06:42, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Comment, @I dream of horses: the individual created the draft on 9 October 2024, the election held on 14 November 2024 with the swearing in of elected members on 21 November 2024. The individual was clearly attempting to use Wikipedia at the time of creation as WP:SELFPROMOTION. Dan arndt (talk) 06:50, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

@Dan arndt sigh I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 06:58, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

@Dan arndt:, @I dream of horses: I believe there is a UPE operation going on in the background. Here are my observations,

• Articles: Prasad Katulanda, Thushara Perera, Draft:Chrishantha Abeysena. All three are Sri Lankan medical doctors.
• One account, one article MO: All three accounts never have created a second article. This way they are evading SPI scrutiny.
• Bullet form texts: initial version of Abeysena.
• Bolding common terms.
• Extensive publication section (copying from Google scholar?)
• Magical appearing of head shot photos. portrait of Katulanda vs portrait of Perera vs portrait of Abeysena (deleted now). Looks like they have learned to Flickr-wash in Perera and Abesena instances.

User:Pharaoh of the Wizards have created Krishantha Abeysena yesterday, though it seems Chrishantha Abesena is the more common spelling. Can we now reject the Abeysena draft as an article already exists? Folks, also kindly keep an eye on new articles on Sri Lankan doctors as well. Regards, Chanaka L (talk) 08:57, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

You might try SPI again with this new account. The last one was declined because the data was stale, but Drneuroscience won't be stale to Prof. Chrishantha. -- asilvering (talk) 10:27, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement. Will do. Cheers! Chanaka L (talk) 10:51, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Draft: Barre Center for Buddhist Studies

Question: is there any newspaper coverage?

Response: While there are the substantial profiles in magazines, I don't believe there is anything quite so extensive about the Center itself in a newspaper article. That is, it's not clear that there has been any major "news" about the Center that has occurred in the 30ish years of its operation.

The closest I can find is references to BCBS in newspaper profiles of people who are somehow connected to the Center:

https://books.google.com/books?id=7F4lAAAAIBAJ&pg=PA11&dq=%22Barre+Center+for+Buddhist+Studies%22&article_id=2630,1253722&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiinNakjuaJAxW95ckDHfmjEccQ6AF6BAgIEAI

https://books.google.com/books?id=-V4lAAAAIBAJ&pg=PA16&dq=%22Barre+Center+for+Buddhist+Studies%22&article_id=535,3318393&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiinNakjuaJAxW95ckDHfmjEccQ6AF6BAgHEAI

https://books.google.com/books?id=BPdkAAAAIBAJ&pg=PA77&dq=%22Barre+Center+for+Buddhist+Studies%22&article_id=645,1301186&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiinNakjuaJAxW95ckDHfmjEccQ6AF6BAgKEAI

https://books.google.com/books?id=6l4lAAAAIBAJ&pg=PA18&dq=%22Barre+Center+for+Buddhist+Studies%22&article_id=1048,1058211&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiinNakjuaJAxW95ckDHfmjEccQ6AF6BAgJEAI Stephentroy (talk) 14:44, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Hm, bummer. I was hoping there would be come kind of mention in a mainstream news outlet, since it would be easier to determine whether that met the guidelines at WP:INDEPENDENT. -- asilvering (talk) 17:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Yup, independence is indeed a concern! BCBS has no relationship to Tricycle, Lion's Roar, Inquiring Mind, Buddhistdoor Global, or the Journal of IABS. But since they all exist within the same broad industry, it's not clear they are independent in the relevant sense.

One of the most independent sources I can find would be this transcript for the radio show, "On Being": https://web.archive.org/web/20150906155355/http://www.onbeing.org/program/transcript/7711 . The mention there doesn't amount to much, so I didn't use it for the text of the draft (though, interestingly, the relevant section is already cited in Abigail Washburn's wiki page).

It may also be relevant that you can view BCBS on Propublica and Lenz Foundation. The latter has enough information that I've added it as a citation to the draft.

Does any of this help? Stephentroy (talk) 18:21, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Ok, I've spent a bit more time looking into the sources on the draft, and it looks to me like the only one that is fully independent and also significant coverage is the Lion's Roar piece ([17]). So I think the better route forward for this information is to place it in Insight Meditation Society under a new section heading (as an editor with a WP:COI, you'll need to use Template:COI edit to propose the edit, rather than making it yourself directly). Then what we can do is create a redirect page from Barre Center for Buddhist Studies to that section heading. I understand that they're not the same organization, but that's fine - they're closely related enough to be covered in the same article.

Before you submit an edit request, I'd advise rewording BCBS endeavors to create a unique bridge, as I expect that will be seen as promotional language by the editor who actions the request. -- asilvering (talk) 21:42, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Alright, yes this is what I expected to happen, since I struggled to find the necessary sources. It's not an ideal solution, as you mention, but having a section within that other article is better than nothing! At least that will allow all the other mentions of the Center to link somewhere. Thank you for your time, your kind assistance, and the clear guidance for moving forward! I'll follow your instructions. Stephentroy (talk) 13:50, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:50, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Question about topic ban

I've been wondering to apply (again) to be a pending changes reviewer. Do you think I should apply even though I have a topic ban? 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 13:03, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

No. -- asilvering (talk) 17:46, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Block user

66.108.60.54,some distruptive editing UnsungHistory (Questions?) (Did I mess up?) 22:44, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

I mean,unconstructive UnsungHistory (Questions?) (Did I mess up?) 22:48, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

@UnsungHistory, that's from 2023. We're not going to block an IP for that. -- asilvering (talk) 22:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

oh,I though the edits are from 2024,I mis-saw that UnsungHistory (Questions?) (Did I mess up?) 23:09, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

If they were from January of 2024, that would still be really stale. We block people to protect the encyclopedia from disruption. If there isn't current disruption, we don't usually want to block. If you do find ongoing disruption, that's urgent, so please report it at WP:AIV. -- asilvering (talk) 23:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

I also know about this block,that came in late UnsungHistory (Questions?) (Did I mess up?) 23:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Question from Detailed Source (16:06, 20 November 2024)

Good morning. I have drafted a detailed history and architectural summary for the existing wikipedia page, House at 230 Melrose Street. I plan to substitute a current photo of the property for the one that is displayed. I also hope to add a photo of the original owner and perhaps an undated image of the house showing features that have been removed over time. I would appreciate guidance, including review of the material that I've generated if that is feasible. --Detailed Source (talk) 16:06, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Detailed Source, welcome to Wikipedia! I can't review anything that hasn't been published on the encyclopedia yet. It looks like this question is your only edit, so you may have forgotten to hit the "publish" button on a draft or in your sandbox? My advice is to simply add what you've written directly to the existing wikipedia article. If your edit is reverted for some reason, the editor who reverts it should give you a reason, which should help you understand what needs to be fixed or why it was unsuitable. If that happens and you don't understand what the other editor said, feel free to come back here and ask for a translation. Just in case, please also read WP:COI. If you have a conflict of interest regarding this building, you don't want to be editing the article directly. -- asilvering (talk) 17:39, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Detailed Source Just a quick note from someone who edits in this area: the main reason why additions to articles such as House at 230 Melrose Street do not get accepted is that they are (or appear to be) based on personal observations, rather than reliable sources. There's a few things about buildings that can be acceptable from observation (eg basic facts such as how many windows there are), but generally one needs to cite reputable sources such as newspapers, books or academic articles. Hope this helps, Espresso Addict (talk) 18:14, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Gosh, what a fascinatingly ugly house. Proof that the McMansion gene was always there, just latent, waiting for its epigenetic trigger. -- asilvering (talk) 18:27, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

It's fascinating -- you just don't get that kind of architecture in the UK, as far as I know. Espresso Addict (talk) 18:33, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for replying promptly. I didn't understand the sequence of editing AFTER posting rather than before. I'll publish sometime later today.

I understand about COI and believe that the material I've prepared is factual and well-sourced, but I'll be interested to learn whether anything is contrary to WP standards. 108.26.210.215 (talk) 18:26, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Don't forget to log in when you edit! -- asilvering (talk) 18:27, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

I was able to upload 3 images, but a filter is blocking the upload of my narrative because the format is .pdf. I created this because Microsoft Word format was prohibited. I've submitted an appeal, but don't know whether it is likely to help. Is there a format I should be using instead? Detailed Source (talk) 20:41, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

@Detailed Source, by "narrative", do you mean the text you intend to add to the article? You simply add that directly, by clicking "edit" (or "edit source") and typing in your changes. -- asilvering (talk) 21:10, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

I've left a welcome notice on your talk page that has some helpful links. You'll want to read all the ones under "getting started" before you make any other edits. -- asilvering (talk) 21:11, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

How do I find out what is my real amount of edits

according to my main page I did less edits then my contributions special page says UnsungHistory (Questions?) (Did I mess up?) 22:56, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Oh wait suddenly they are the same UnsungHistory (Questions?) (Did I mess up?) 00:19, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

and speaking of my contributions,a lot of them are getting reverted....Particularly the ones where I was trying to enforce the policies,such as removing irrelevant talk page stuff that is not about improving an article,including one uncivil comment I removed today at Talk:United States,I do not get what I am doing wrong, UnsungHistory (Questions?) (Did I mess up?) 03:52, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Question from Igordavid2004 on Wellington Fund (10:07, 21 November 2024)

Buenos días Estuve trabajando con una empresa de traíding comprando criptomonedas,se generaron unas ganancias,y ahora me piden una póliza de transacción con vuestra empresa y no sé si todo esto es verdad o es una estafa --Igordavid2004 (talk) 10:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC)