This is an archive of past discussions about User:Buidhe. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The section "Impact" is not balanced or neutral. You can't create a lengthy section relying on only one single source. The source used (the CoE) is also biased itself towards the court (obviously). A source being biased is not in and of itself a problem (few sources are actually neutral), but for balance other sources must be added too. 123username (talk) 06:54, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Is that helpful somehow? Instead of having actual information? People should be forced look at another article to get information which the title of this page describes they should get?★Trekker (talk) 22:15, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
*Treker, Excerpting shows the relevant content on the page. It is not the same as a "see also" link which does force you to click on a link to see more information. (t · c) buidhe22:17, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
As a prolific image reviewer at FAC, I figured you might have some insight. I'm wanting to take a picture of this page in this 1950 publication. Normally I'd assume this wouldn't be allowed, but as a reproduction of music I'm wondering if an exception of some kind exists? Best, Aza24 (talk) 07:41, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
You reverted the article back to it's previous, obviously politically biased state, which referred to South Africans leaving the country to escape Apartheid persecution as "terrorists". Due to your actions the article now again uses badly sourced and biased material to spin a narrative that tries to glorify and justify this act of terror against the sovereign nation of Botswana, an act of terror by the Apartheid government which prompted a swift diplomatic response by the United States, the United Kingdom, many other countries and the United Nations. Please refrain from further disruptive edits in favour of extremist narratives!
HartaMarta (talk) 08:05, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Dear Buidhe, would you please consider doing a source review for the article Pepi I Meryre, which is currently at FAC ? The article has been posted there a while ago and as received only one text review so far, so I am worried about it failing for want of reviews, in particular image and source ones. Thank you.Iry-Hor (talk) 11:30, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Iry-Hor, I am actually backlogged at the moment, unfortunately, although it's possible I might be able to do it after clearing out what I already promised to do. (t · c) buidhe11:46, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
On 13 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Milan Mazurek, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in September 2019, far-right politician Milan Mazurek became the first Slovak parliamentarian to lose his seat due to a crime after comparing Romani children to "animals in the zoo"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Milan Mazurek. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Milan Mazurek), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.
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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:56, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Hi Buidhe. I see that you are using some king of bot or code that removes wikilinks leading to disamb. pages. Please reconsider. It is allowed on Wiki to set in such links, because they do contain information (mainly by explaining the term in the lead, but not only). If your bot does automatically remove the link, it takes something away from the Wiki user, which goes against the very reason why we have Wiki. Also, some disambig. page does evolve into a proper article and then it's double right to have it linked. There is no downside, nothing to lose. I am careful about where I'm using such links, and Wiki sends me emails when I do and I go back and double-check. But even if other editors don't do that, it should be checked case by case, the criterion always being: does it clarify a term or otherwise add useful info? If it does, the link is justified and should stay on.
Concrete case: please look here, where the link leads to nahala. The linking was intentional, as that page also explains the term and doesn't just disambiguate. Hebrew is not an internationally widely used language :)))
On 22 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Greek Case, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the European Commission of Human Rights found in 1969 that the Greek junta systematically tortured dissidents, leading to Greece's exit from the Council of Europe? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The Greek Case), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Speedy deletion of Jananayak Dr. Chowdari Satyanarayana (CSN) Article
Hello Sir, I hope that you would be safe and sound. My name is Mutahar Maqsood. I have uploded the biography of Dr. Chowdari Satyanarayana but it has been removed from the wikipedai and the reason which I have received for the rejection was that the information which is used with the intention of pormoting any agency or company . can you kindly explain it more details it and i will really appreciate that if let me know that still can i revive my article so that i can do the changes there.
Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mutahar Maqsood (talk • contribs)
@Mutahar Maqsood: the article was deleted by an administrator because 1) had no verifiable sources, 2) did not follow WP:NPOV policy by promoting the subject in subjective terms, rather than stating objective accomplishments of the subject. If you write an article in line with Wikipedia policies, making sure to cite all information and maintain a neutral tone, it will not be deleted. (t · c) buidhe05:36, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Can you kindly Transfer it in sandbox
I have uploaded the biography of Dr. Chowdari Satyanarayana but it has been removed from Wikipedia and the reason which I have received for the rejection was that the information which is used with the intention of promoting any agency or company. can you kindly explain it more details it and i will really appreciate that if let me know that still can i revive my article so that I can do the changes there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mutahar Maqsood (talk • contribs)
Hello Buidhe. I’ve nominated an [article] for GA. After working with many editors and admins to get it to where it is now, I think it’s ready for the process. If time permits, with your help I would like to give it a GA stamp of approval, please. Thank you for your time, and thank you for your consideration. I look forward to any collaborative efforts and guidance.TruthGuardians (talk) 16:53, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Pigsonthewing, In the discussion, only one person explicitly called for deletion. You did not, and in your comment, you did not state any issue that would be addressed by deleting rather than redirecting the template. My understanding was that redirecting templates is generally preferred to deletion because that causes fewer problems when viewing older revisions of pages that previously transcluded the template. (t · c) buidhe22:45, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
My nomination was for deletion and, I think, clearly so. Had I meant redirection, I would have said so; or simply redirected it. There were no people explicitly calling for redirection. If anything, I think redirection will cause more, not fewer, problems on old pages. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits23:01, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your recent articles, including Rescuer (genocide), which I read with interest. When you create a new article, can you add the WikiProject assessment templates to the talk of that article? See the talk page of the article I mentioned for an example of what I mean. Usually it is very simple, you just add something like {{WikiProject Keyword}} to the article's talk, with keyword replaced by the associated WikiProject (ex. if it's a biography article, you would use WikiProject Biography; if it's a United States article, you would use WikiProject United States, and so on). You do not have to rate the article if you do not want to, others will do it eventually. Those templates are very useful, as they bring the articles to a WikiProject attention, and allow them to start tracking the articles through Wikipedia:Article alerts and other tools. For example, WikiProject Poland relies on such templates to generate listings such as Article Alerts, Popular Pages, Quality and Importance Matrix and the Cleanup Listing. Thanks to them, WikiProject members are more easily able to defend your work from deletion, or simply help try to improve it further. Feel free to ask me any questions if you'd like more information about using those talk page templates. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here04:46, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
DYK for Decent interval
On 24 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Decent interval, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a historical theory argues that Nixon sought a decent interval between American withdrawal and South Vietnamese collapse to avoid becoming the first president to lose a war? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Decent interval. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Decent interval), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Hello Buidhe, Greetings! If the filmography section is excluded from the article, then do you agree on moving draft to article? Because many actors of Kannada cinema, have separate article on filmography. --Gpkp[u • t • c]07:32, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Buidhe, Thank you for your suggestion. My one observance is that, the filmography section is considerably large. Dosent it justify for it to be in a seperate article? --Gpkp[u • t • c]08:01, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
What’s the article title of that article? How do you justify this revert? [1] Should I tell you how many times you reverted the word “prison" by now? You are such a great contributor and I like you but sometimes looks like you are having trouble to compromise.GizzyCatBella🍁22:06, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
GizzyCatBella, If it is determined that this article is not covered by your t-ban I would suggest commenting on the last section on the talk page. Surely you know by now that the quality of sources is more important than quantity. (t · c) buidhe22:11, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
But it was a prison, there are sources for that. Other names are also in the lead as you wanted. Why this hard stance despite at least 3 people disagreeing with you on that? This is what I’m not getting Buidhe. - GizzyCatBella🍁22:15, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
GizzyCatBella, A prison is where people are held according to the law. This place was not a prison, because the people were not detained according to laws, but according to the whims of the authorities. That is the definition of internment/concentration camp. So far no one has addressed this distinction. (t · c) buidhe22:22, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Okay, Buidhe, you know my position on this one, and I hope you will respect it. I'll let you sort this with Piotrus then, but remember what my view is, please - GizzyCatBella🍁22:30, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello Buidhe! I have added more references where the programs are being broadcast from GMA's digital channel Heart of Asia. Can you review my draft that I've edited recently? Would be appreciated if it can be moved back to being an regular article. Thanks! David Isaac C. M. (talk) 00:48, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
I inherited http://wwi-cookup.com/ from a prior editor. I backed it up with another cite as can be seen. Should have deleted it at that time. Thanks for the heads up.
The Aerodrome has a bibliography, which by consensus makes a website reliable. We in the WWI aviation history community established that some years ago in a consensus. Also, some of the world's most published and greatest authorities on WWI aviation are behind the site--Greg VanWyngarden, for instance. These are the same historians that we cite when they publish in print. It makes no sense to say they are reliable in print, but not on the internet. Kinda reminiscent of the argument that paper encyclopedias are better than Wikipedia.
Er, paper encyclopedias are often reliable sources according to WP:RS; whereas, Wikipedia is never considered a reliable source (WP:CIRCULAR). I will post this to WP:RSN for feedback from uninvolved editors. (t · c) buidhe04:09, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
I realize that, in my haste, I have been ambiguous. I am not plumping for WP as a self-referential source. And I realize that WP has to legally cover its butt by insisting that, overall, changes will happen. However, the concept that only print sources are grist for an internet encyclopedia goes against the flow of events. MSM is fading as Internet news picks up. Information storage is rising into the Cloud. WP is pretty unchanging except for growth; not much deletion going on.
The Aerodrome website has a bibliography page buried deep within. Pain in the tail to find. Some biography pages in the site cite the source(s) at the foot--where the historians cite the very books I use when I can find them.
Hi Buidhe, I noticed that your bot edited a portion of the U.S. Army Distinctive unit insignia page. Just a slight heads up that we keep the unit mottos on the insignia as unlinked as often they can get linked to a completely different meaning than what is actually meant by the U.S. Army Institute of Heraldry. The meaning of the mottos on the DUI's gets explained in the units page generally under the Crest sections and comes directly from the TIOH. Rukia8492 (talk) 15:38, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
On 2 October 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Error has no rights, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that according to the superseded Catholic doctrine that "error has no rights", non-Catholics did not deserve civil or political rights? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Error has no rights. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Error has no rights), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Why are you moving so many articles out of this category? They've been added to this category over the years and doing an mass emptying is not appropriate. LizRead!Talk!01:00, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Hello Buidhe. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:WekaFS, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:03, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Need Your help in Begin Sadat Center for strategic studies
Buidhe, you are still listed as the reviewer of this GA nomination, yet you have not been responding to pings. If you are no longer interested in pursuing this review, please let me know and I'll look for another reviewer. If you are, please post in response to the recent comments there. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:15, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
Holcman1, Hello, thanks for your contributions! Unfortunately, we have to confirm that you have the rights to the content in question. The easiest way to donate your text so that it can be used on Wikipedia is to add somewhere on the website a "The text of this paper is available for modification and reuse under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License." (This is the same free license that Wikipedia uses.)
If that is not possible, there are other ways to do it; see WP:DONATETEXT.
Once we have established that you have the rights to the text, please let me know and I will ask an administrator to undelete the page. (t · c) buidhe21:27, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Pelagianism you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aircorn -- Aircorn (talk) 02:41, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the WikiChevrons for participating in 45 reviews between July and September 2020. Harrias (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 05:29, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I probably should have clarified it somewhere, but the purpose of this submission is actually to allow us to move the corresponding section to a separate article, since it's already too long and its disproportionate length hinders addition of new material. So, should I resubmit it? -- Nicholas Velasquez (talk) 11:01, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
Your name appears in the page history of an article I created, stating you added the AfC box. The article has been moved to the Draft space; something that I have never heard of before, even though I have created 237 pages in Wikipedia. I did find, on the Wikipedia AfC page this sentence "The Articles for Creation (AfC) process is intended to assist editors who cannot (e.g. non-registered or non-autoconfirmed users)... create new articles directly into mainspace." But I am far from "non-regitered" and far from "non-autoconfirmed". I made my first edit in 2006 and I have 9,165 live edits. I have had the same user-name the entire time, and I was logged-in when I created the moved article. I am, to say the least, deeply puzzled as to why it was moved to Drafts. Since your name appears in the history, I hope you can explain why it was moved. I am assuming good faith, but believe some error was made. Nick Beeson (talk) 14:39, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks! I am also not too sure if relisting helps to get more reactions, but leaving a discussion open for a longer period because of too few initial reactions certainly doesn't harm. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:16, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
Extended confirmed user - can I start articles direct?
Hello:
You recently contacted me about my translation from the German Wiki on Martin Dibobe. This now appears in the English Wiki and I am pleased about that. I believe that I am now an 'Extended Confirmed User'.
I have new article, this time from the Italian Wiki but with a lot of new information, all of which is cited. It is still in draft form and I will finish it within a day or two.
My question is this: will it have to stay in Draft form until I have submitted it for approval? Or can I just go ahead and put it up onto the English Wiki off my own bat, given that I am an 'Extended Confirmed User'?
Hello. I was just wondering how the 2021 MLB season page can become active and not a draft. There has been three managerial changes that are on the list now. Thank you. posty (talk) 17:25, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
On 17 October 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Adam Puławski, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that 130 historians protested the Institute of National Remembrance's removal of Adam Puławski from his position researching Polish–Jewish relations during World War II? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Adam Puławski. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Adam Puławski), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
The Wikipedia Library
; see Talk:Polish Stonewall for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wasted Time R -- Wasted Time R (talk) 23:02, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Error has no rights at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:55, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Most Comfortable Chair -- The Most Comfortable Chair (talk) 05:22, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Nástup for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Most Comfortable Chair -- The Most Comfortable Chair (talk) 08:02, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Buidhe reported by User:Eric (Result: ). Thank you. Eric talk 11:09, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
